Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[Dryden]

 

[dragurd]

I'm cautiously optimistic...

However the problem with this agrrement they can easily be broken as soon as the lager powers start to complain. We did this years ago with PAC until USC and the ilk started whining and it quickly fell apart. The ACC will probably be linch pin here. I'd hope the PAC12 learned from their idiocy of killing it last time. However the ACC has traditionally been aligned to ESPN and the SEC. So do they really want to stand up to the big bad SEC or are they little brother big brother can get to spy and gum up the works for them..

 

[LordJeffBuck]

 

[billmac91]

I HATE it personally.

Having a regular season scheduling alliance doesn’t mean dick.

And the ACC gave up their rights until 2035!!!!! ESPN owns that ass.

Any chess move we think we played right now can easily be undone by ESPN re-negotiating their rights with the ACC. All it takes is the stroke of a pen and the ACC is right back in line with ESPN and the SEC.

All this move does is give the ACC leverage against ESPN. But keep in mind the ACC and SEC networks are both run out of same studio/office in Charlotte. ESPN absolutely has financial interest in both succeeding. And while ESPN shelled out massive $$$ for SEC and got the ACC on very friendly financial terms, ESPN can retroactively sweeten the pot whenever they want.

The Big 10 has its own merits to stand on. The Big 10 also has a good partnership with Fox Sports. This move appears to be a shot at the bow of the SEC/ESPN, but in 3 chess moves, we get played for fools if ACC leverages the new scheduling alliance and playoff discussion to get a fatter deal with ESPN or worse yet, the ACC manipulates business dealings playing both sides of fence.

All of a sudden, the ACC is swinging a bigger dick than the Big 10 which should never happen under any circumstances.

I do not view this as a positive whatsoever. I’m extremely skeptical….and unfortunately, the Big 10 leadership gives me little reason for optimism.

 

[Zurp]

And the Truck Stop Conference gets an expanded playoff that they think will land them 5 or 6 spots every year.

I quoted this line not to argue with you or the fact that the SEC will expect 5-6 teams in the expanded playoff. But will they actually get that? From what I understand, the top 6 conference champions will get in, and then the next 6 teams will get in.

Going through each year,
In 2014, Alabama won the SEC. Teams that also would have made it were Mississippi State and Mississippi. That's 3 teams.
In 2015, Alabama won it again. I don't see anyone else from the SEC that would have made it.
In 2016, Alabama won it again. Next ranked team was Auburn at 14. They would not have made it. (Big Ten would have gotten 4 teams in: Penn State won the Big Ten, then Ohio State was 3, Michigan was 6, and Wisconsin was 8.)
In 2017, I think Georgia won the SEC, and Alabama would have been in. Auburn would have been in. LSU was next highest ranked at 17. They would not have made it. So that's 3 SEC teams.
In 2018, Alabama won the SEC, Georgia was #5, so they're in. Florida was #10, and LSU was #11. So that's 4 that year.
In 2019, LSU won the conference. Georgia was #5, Florida #9, Auburn #12, and Alabama #13. I think the next 6 seeds would have gone to Georgia (#5), Baylor (#7), Wisconsin (#8), Florida (#9), Penn State (#10), and Utah (#11). So that's 3 SEC teams.
In 2020, Alabama won the conference, again, with Texas A&M (#5), Florida (#7), and Georgia (#9) also getting in.

In 7 years, the SEC would have gotten 3, 1, 1, 3, 4, 3, and 4 teams. That's 2.7 per year. (With an average of 3.5 per year the last 4 years.)
I agree that the SEC and ESPN will want to get 5-6 teams into the playoffs. ESPN will lobby to get it. And I think ESPN's lobbying will affect the outcome. But will they actually get to 5-6 teams?
Maybe the problem isn't whether they'll get what they want. Maybe the problem will be that they'll fight and bitch and moan to get it to 5-6 teams. I guess if they get what they want, the next thing we need to root for is that those 6 teams to combine for only 2 wins that year in the playoffs.

 

[BigWoof31]

IDK why OSU fans would be excited (and this time, I'm not being a smart ass).

You guys ALREADY schedule monster OOC games.
Oklahoma, VT, Texas, Washington, Oregon, Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia

It seems like it helps the rest of the B1G more than it helps the Buckeyes. A rising tide raises all ships I guess?

Follow up question:
If the scheduling alliance is locked into place amongst the three leagues and games start getting put on future schedules, is there additional cause for delaying the 12 team playoff?

 

[Woody1968]

I HATE it personally.

Having a regular season scheduling alliance doesn’t mean dick.

And the ACC gave up their rights until 2035!!!!! ESPN owns that ass.

Any chess move we think we played right now can easily be undone by ESPN re-negotiating their rights with the ACC. All it takes is the stroke of a pen and the ACC is right back in line with ESPN and the SEC.

All this move does is give the ACC leverage against ESPN. But keep in mind the ACC and SEC networks are both run out of same studio/office in Charlotte. ESPN absolutely has financial interest in both succeeding. And while ESPN shelled out massive $$$ for SEC and got the ACC on very friendly financial terms, ESPN can retroactively sweeten the pot whenever they want.

The Big 10 has its own merits to stand on. The Big 10 also has a good partnership with Fox Sports. This move appears to be a shot at the bow of the SEC/ESPN, but in 3 chess moves, we get played for fools if ACC leverages the new scheduling alliance and playoff discussion to get a fatter deal with ESPN or worse yet, the ACC manipulates business dealings playing both sides of fence.

All of a sudden, the ACC is swinging a bigger dick than the Big 10 which should never happen under any circumstances.

I do not view this as a positive whatsoever. I’m extremely skeptical….and unfortunately, the Big 10 leadership gives me little reason for optimism.

The ACC are free to renegotiate a new GOR if they expand.

 

[Mike80]

IDK why OSU fans would be excited (and this time, I'm not being a smart ass).

You guys ALREADY schedule monster OOC games.
Oklahoma, VT, Texas, Washington, Oregon, Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia

It seems like it helps the rest of the B1G more than it helps the Buckeyes. A rising tide raises all ships I guess?

Follow up question:
If the scheduling alliance is locked into place amongst the three leagues and games start getting put on future schedules, is there additional cause for delaying the 12 team playoff?

Yes because fuck ESECPN that's why....it's been clear since the BCS days they were manipulating things - teams, rankings, conference association - for their gain and they found a willing partner in the SECSECSEC to achieve it.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I HATE it personally.

Having a regular season scheduling alliance doesn’t mean dick.

And the ACC gave up their rights until 2035!!!!! ESPN owns that ass.

Any chess move we think we played right now can easily be undone by ESPN re-negotiating their rights with the ACC. All it takes is the stroke of a pen and the ACC is right back in line with ESPN and the SEC.

All this move does is give the ACC leverage against ESPN. But keep in mind the ACC and SEC networks are both run out of same studio/office in Charlotte. ESPN absolutely has financial interest in both succeeding. And while ESPN shelled out massive $$$ for SEC and got the ACC on very friendly financial terms, ESPN can retroactively sweeten the pot whenever they want.

The Big 10 has its own merits to stand on. The Big 10 also has a good partnership with Fox Sports. This move appears to be a shot at the bow of the SEC/ESPN, but in 3 chess moves, we get played for fools if ACC leverages the new scheduling alliance and playoff discussion to get a fatter deal with ESPN or worse yet, the ACC manipulates business dealings playing both sides of fence.

All of a sudden, the ACC is swinging a bigger dick than the Big 10 which should never happen under any circumstances.

I do not view this as a positive whatsoever. I’m extremely skeptical….and unfortunately, the Big 10 leadership gives me little reason for optimism.

In the hands of competent B1G leadership I don't think the ACC ultimately acting in their own self interest should be a surprise or would be that big of a deal.

At the end of it all the B1G and the PAC12 turn into a FOX Sports affiliated super conference with the Rose Bowl. The ACC and SEC are with ESPN. You force ND to make a choice and you work out a television rights deal/CFP expansion agreement operating from a position of equal, to superior, strength.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

I quoted this line not to argue with you or the fact that the SEC will expect 5-6 teams in the expanded playoff. But will they actually get that? From what I understand, the top 6 conference champions will get in, and then the next 6 teams will get in.

Going through each year,
In 2014, Alabama won the SEC. Teams that also would have made it were Mississippi State and Mississippi. That's 3 teams.
In 2015, Alabama won it again. I don't see anyone else from the SEC that would have made it.
In 2016, Alabama won it again. Next ranked team was Auburn at 14. They would not have made it. (Big Ten would have gotten 4 teams in: Penn State won the Big Ten, then Ohio State was 3, Michigan was 6, and Wisconsin was 8.)
In 2017, I think Georgia won the SEC, and Alabama would have been in. Auburn would have been in. LSU was next highest ranked at 17. They would not have made it. So that's 3 SEC teams.
In 2018, Alabama won the SEC, Georgia was #5, so they're in. Florida was #10, and LSU was #11. So that's 4 that year.
In 2019, LSU won the conference. Georgia was #5, Florida #9, Auburn #12, and Alabama #13. I think the next 6 seeds would have gone to Georgia (#5), Baylor (#7), Wisconsin (#8), Florida (#9), Penn State (#10), and Utah (#11). So that's 3 SEC teams.
In 2020, Alabama won the conference, again, with Texas A&M (#5), Florida (#7), and Georgia (#9) also getting in.

In 7 years, the SEC would have gotten 3, 1, 1, 3, 4, 3, and 4 teams. That's 2.7 per year. (With an average of 3.5 per year the last 4 years.)
I agree that the SEC and ESPN will want to get 5-6 teams into the playoffs. ESPN will lobby to get it. And I think ESPN's lobbying will affect the outcome. But will they actually get to 5-6 teams?
Maybe the problem isn't whether they'll get what they want. Maybe the problem will be that they'll fight and bitch and moan to get it to 5-6 teams. I guess if they get what they want, the next thing we need to root for is that those 6 teams to combine for only 2 wins that year in the playoffs.

A couple of thoughts. First, you'd have to include Okie into all of those years. Second, the SEC! is looking to how the future will play out. They're probably buying into the TEXAS WILL GET BACK IF THEY'RE SEC!!!, and they're also considering the hype factor of the SEC! growing even larger in influencing the committee. I guarantee you that Sankey and the SEC AD's were looking at the expanded playoff and seeing a world where only getting three teams in would be a disastrously down year, and given espn's influence on the discussion, they were probably right.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

It's looking like this has a hell of a lot more to do with blocking espn and the SEC! than it does with scheduling arrangements. Sorry haters, but this is a good, solid strategic move. It doesn't suck solely because Warren has his hands on it.

 

[BuckTwenty]

I quoted this line not to argue with you or the fact that the SEC will expect 5-6 teams in the expanded playoff. But will they actually get that? From what I understand, the top 6 conference champions will get in, and then the next 6 teams will get in.

Going through each year,
In 2014, Alabama won the SEC. Teams that also would have made it were Mississippi State and Mississippi. That's 3 teams.
In 2015, Alabama won it again. I don't see anyone else from the SEC that would have made it.
In 2016, Alabama won it again. Next ranked team was Auburn at 14. They would not have made it. (Big Ten would have gotten 4 teams in: Penn State won the Big Ten, then Ohio State was 3, Michigan was 6, and Wisconsin was 8.)
In 2017, I think Georgia won the SEC, and Alabama would have been in. Auburn would have been in. LSU was next highest ranked at 17. They would not have made it. So that's 3 SEC teams.
In 2018, Alabama won the SEC, Georgia was #5, so they're in. Florida was #10, and LSU was #11. So that's 4 that year.
In 2019, LSU won the conference. Georgia was #5, Florida #9, Auburn #12, and Alabama #13. I think the next 6 seeds would have gone to Georgia (#5), Baylor (#7), Wisconsin (#8), Florida (#9), Penn State (#10), and Utah (#11). So that's 3 SEC teams.
In 2020, Alabama won the conference, again, with Texas A&M (#5), Florida (#7), and Georgia (#9) also getting in.

In 7 years, the SEC would have gotten 3, 1, 1, 3, 4, 3, and 4 teams. That's 2.7 per year. (With an average of 3.5 per year the last 4 years.)
I agree that the SEC and ESPN will want to get 5-6 teams into the playoffs. ESPN will lobby to get it. And I think ESPN's lobbying will affect the outcome. But will they actually get to 5-6 teams?
Maybe the problem isn't whether they'll get what they want. Maybe the problem will be that they'll fight and bitch and moan to get it to 5-6 teams. I guess if they get what they want, the next thing we need to root for is that those 6 teams to combine for only 2 wins that year in the playoffs.

Like you said, over the last 4 years, the SEC has averaged 3.5 teams. Add Oklahoma to that conglomerate and its now 4.5 teams, or getting 5 teams into the playoff 50% of the time (which is a number the SEC & ESPN are striving for)

That's why people are proper flipped out. Oklahoma changed everything... and the SEC is betting that the NIL only strengthens their league and their potential to make the playoffs from the bottom up

The bottom line is that the ACC needs to be bigger than just Clemson every year, and the Pac 12 has to get loads better than what they have been the last few years, getting consistently left out of the CFP. That's why the B1G is going through this alliance and trying to lift those ships

 

[LordJeffBuck]

It's looking like this has a hell of a lot more to do with blocking espn and the SEC! than it does with scheduling arrangements. Sorry haters, but this is a good, solid strategic move. It doesn't suck solely because Warren has his hands on it.

Schedule one conference crossover game in Week 2, then play a second conference crossover game during championship week. Seems like a good way to create a semblance of an alliance while still keeping conference autonomy.

Then form a B1G-ACC-PAC (sponsored by Fox) playoff and leave the SEC! out of it.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

Yes because fuck ESECPN that's why....it's been clear since the BCS days they were manipulating things - teams, rankings, conference association - for their gain and they found a willing partner in the SECSECSEC to achieve it.

This. ESPN's love affair with the SEC started with a personal vendetta against us. When the BTN was formed, ESPN decided it was time to shit all over whoever was at the top of the B1G. That's us.

 

[Zurp]

A couple of thoughts. First, you'd have to include Okie into all of those years.

Fair, but with Oklahoma in there (and Texas, I suppose), the other SEC! teams are going to lose more games OR Oklahoma will lose more games. I don't think just adding Oklahoma's results against the Big 12 without playing against SEC! teams is the correct math.

Second, the SEC! is looking to how the future will play out. They're probably buying into the TEXAS WILL GET BACK IF THEY'RE SEC!!!, and they're also considering the hype factor of the SEC! growing even larger in influencing the committee. I guarantee you that Sankey and the SEC AD's were looking at the expanded playoff and seeing a world where only getting three teams in would be a disastrously down year, and given espn's influence on the discussion, they were probably right.

Again, fair. I think Oklahoma (and Texas, I suppose) will add more to the hype than to the substance. I was going to say that every game has a winner and ever game has a loser, but the SEC! somehow counts losses as wins (there's truth in that thread name). But I still think that adding Oklahoma into the mix is just going to create more losses to go around. It'll be more hype than substance.

Like you said, over the last 4 years, the SEC has averaged 3.5 teams. Add Oklahoma to that conglomerate and its now 4.5 teams, or getting 5 teams into the playoff 50% of the time (which is a number the SEC & ESPN are striving for)

Again, all things being equal, I don't think you can just add Oklahoma's success in the Big 12 and say that it translates perfectly to the SEC!. First, either Oklahoma will lose more games (probably), or second, the other SEC! teams will lose more games (also probably). So say Oklahoma has averaged an 11-2 record over the past 7 years (playoff era). In the SEC! they may average 10-2, 9-3, or 8-4. They'll still win games, but we all agree that the competition will be tougher. And the wins that Oklahoma is getting will add another loss to LSU, Florida, Texas A&M, etc., which knocks them back a few spots.

That's why people are proper flipped out. Oklahoma changed everything... and the SEC is betting that the NIL only strengthens their league and their potential to make the playoffs from the bottom up

Again, fair. I hadn't considered how NIL will play out in the years to come.

The bottom line is that the ACC needs to be bigger than just Clemson every year, and the Pac 12 has to get loads better than what they have been the last few years, getting consistently left out of the CFP. That's why the B1G is going through this alliance and trying to lift those ships

If the ACC needs to be bigger than just Clemson, does the Big Ten need to be bigger than just Ohio State? Ohio State is still the only Big Ten team to have scored a point in the playoffs.

I'm all for turning this into a Game of Thrones power struggle. I kinda hope that they stick with a 4-team or maybe go to the terrible 8-team model that I hate but everyone else always loved. Or, let's go the other way: a 128-team tournament (7 rounds). "Oh, the SEC! got 100% of their teams in the conference? So did the AAC."