Official realignment thread - SEC formally invites OU and Texas to join the conference in 2025

[BUFFering]

I mean, sure, but that doesn't negate the point. We could be winning 10 games a year right now and we still wouldn't have any truly meaningful rivalry game on the schedule, apart from whatever impact you think our current once every few years OOC rivalry games impact SOS.

Rivalries aren't built in a day and they aren't built by losing. Mac circled Nebraska on the schedule because they were winning. It didn't matter until we started winning. Utah or USC or whoever will only matter when those games have actual implications.

 

[ahoelsken]

Yeah I couldn't disagree more with what you are saying. CSU joining the Pac-12 is worst case scenario. It reduces payouts to current members, frustrated those top tier programs in the conference to push for uneven revenue sharing and dilutes the current TV market. On the other hand, if CSU joins the Big-12 we gain an in state OOC P5 matchup every year, they reduce the payouts to current Big-12 members, and then we get to see all the **** they have to deal with in being in a Big-12 south based conference.

The Big 12 doesn't have to do anything. They get to play a CCG with 10 teams. They could try and raid the Pac 12, and I think that'd probably be their first choice if WVU leaves for the ACC.

https://gazette.com/sports/national...cle_73a20282-9535-11e9-87aa-772c95538135.html

I hope Air Force doesn't leave the MWC for the ACC since that would mean two less rivalry games in the Front Range (AFA-CSU and AFA-Wyoming) especially after CU-Nebraska went away and CU-CSU will be no longer annual.

I don't think this is a concern at all-moving from the MWC to the AAC doesn't do anything for AFA, and they're a big time outlier if you put them in the AAC. What about Rice, Southern Miss, or UTEP to the AAC?

gag ... I'd actually prefer ....gag ...cough ...gah ....Nebraska in the Pac with CU.

I'd love to be in the same conference with the Nubs and playing them every year again-No team in CFB is as fun to beat as they are.

 

[PAC MAN]

I'd take CSU or Nebraska to the PAC in a heartbeat.

 

[BerkeleyBuff]

Rivalries aren't built in a day and they aren't built by losing. Mac circled Nebraska on the schedule because they were winning. It didn't matter until we started winning. Utah or USC or whoever will only matter when those games have actual implications.

We are not the natural, historical rivals of Utah or USC and will never be within the top 3 rivals of USC at best no matter how much we win. I'm saying it'd be fun to have an annual meaningful game against one of our historical rivals. You're arguing well if we win a lot maybe 20 years down the road Utah will see us as a top 2 rivals. I say blah.

 

[onealcd]

The Big 12 doesn't have to do anything. They get to play a CCG with 10 teams. They could try and raid the Pac 12, and I think that'd probably be their first choice if WVU leaves for the ACC.



I don't think this is a concern at all-moving from the MWC to the AAC doesn't do anything for AFA, and they're a big time outlier if you put them in the AAC. What about Rice, Southern Miss, or UTEP to the AAC?



I'd love to be in the same conference with the Nubs and playing them every year again-No team in CFB is as fun to beat as they are.

Okay, I am not sure what this has to do with my post though.

 

[married2abuff]

We are not the natural, historical rivals of Utah or USC and will never be within the top 3 rivals of USC at best no matter how much we win. I'm saying it'd be fun to have an annual meaningful game against one of our historical rivals. You're arguing well if we win a lot maybe 20 years down the road Utah will see us as a top 2 rivals. I say blah.

It would take a lot for USC to think of us as rivals. Now, if we start beating them regularly, the hate/rivalry factor would skyrocket from a Buffs fan's perspective. Utah, OTOH, I can't get excited about them at all. In my pre-marital life, I was brought up in the WAC being an undergrad of New Mexico, and Utah still didn't move the needle for me much. (Except when Van Horn played BB there...I hated them then.) But never in FB.

 

[ahoelsken]

Okay, I am not sure what this has to do with my post though.

They're not a viable expansion candidate for the Big 12 or Pac 12 in my opinion unless they're riding somebodys coattails (Say the Big 12 did decide they wanted to add BYU for example-they could add CSU to give BYU a travel partner), and they're most likely stuck where they are-which is fine by me.

 

[BUFFering]

It would take a lot for USC to think of us as rivals. Now, if we start beating them regularly, the hate/rivalry factor would skyrocket from a Buffs fan's perspective. Utah, OTOH, I can't get excited about them at all. In my pre-marital life, I was brought up in the WAC being an undergrad of New Mexico, and Utah still didn't move the needle for me much. (Except when Van Horn played BB there...I hated them then.) But never in FB.

Rivalries aren't always 2 sided (Michigan and Ohio State). If you were to ask Nebraska fans in the late 80s they'd say their rival was Oklahoma. Point is pick the biggest kid on the block or the one next door (Nebraska just happened to be both) and kick their ass. Until we win constantly, talking about rivals is pointless.

 

[onealcd]

They're not a viable expansion candidate for the Big 12 or Pac 12 in my opinion unless they're riding somebodys coattails (Say the Big 12 did decide they wanted to add BYU for example-they could add CSU to give BYU a travel partner), and they're most likely stuck where they are-which is fine by me.

Oh yeah I agree with that. I was just saying I would much rather have them in the Big-12 than the Pac-12. That would be huge for football in this region to have two power conferences to cover on the front range and the rivalry itself. I have always liked the Big OOC rivalries a lot (UF-FSU, ND-UM, USC-ND, Georgia-G Tech, South Carolina-Clemson).

 

[ahoelsken]

Rivalries aren't always 2 sided (Michigan and Ohio State). If you were to ask Nebraska fans in the late 80s they'd say their rival was Oklahoma. Point is pick the biggest kid on the block or the one next door (Nebraska just happened to be both) and kick their ass. Until we win constantly, talking about rivals is pointless.

We're the closest thing NU has to a rival, and vice versa. I think we need to be playing them as often as feasibly possible-look at how jacked the fanbase was for that game LY, and look at ticket prices for this year-RG and Bill Moos will probably announce additional games after we beat them again on September 7.

 

[MtnBuff]

Rivalries aren't always 2 sided (Michigan and Ohio State). If you were to ask Nebraska fans in the late 80s they'd say their rival was Oklahoma. Point is pick the biggest kid on the block or the one next door (Nebraska just happened to be both) and kick their ass. Until we win constantly, talking about rivals is pointless.

You are right here. Yes the most famous rivalries are two sided but from a fans standpoint it doesn't matter as much how important you are to the other teams fans, what matters is how important the game is to you.

For Iowa State their game against Iowa is much more important than than game is for the Iowa fans. The Iowa fans historically care much more about beating Minnesota and are steadily developing a healthy hatred for Nebraska.

For a long time the CSU fans have talked about their rivalry with Wyoming but their passion is a desire to see a win over CU. As long as we were playing Nebraska the CSU game was never that important to Buffs fans.

USC will always care more about beating Notre Dame and UCLA than anyone else. To us that shouldn't matter. They are the big name in the PAC12 south and the biggest national name in the league. It doesn't matter if us beating them is more important to us than the game is to them, they should be our target.

Just like with Nebraska if we beat USC a few times, if we cost them bowl position or rankings, if we take something from them a few times they will come to hate us too. Still not to match ND and UCLA but who cares. If beating them is fun and important for us I don't care what they think.

 

[ahoelsken]

You are right here. Yes the most famous rivalries are two sided but from a fans standpoint it doesn't matter as much how important you are to the other teams fans, what matters is how important the game is to you.

For Iowa State their game against Iowa is much more important than than game is for the Iowa fans. The Iowa fans historically care much more about beating Minnesota and are steadily developing a healthy hatred for Nebraska.

For a long time the CSU fans have talked about their rivalry with Wyoming but their passion is a desire to see a win over CU. As long as we were playing Nebraska the CSU game was never that important to Buffs fans.

USC will always care more about beating Notre Dame and UCLA than anyone else. To us that shouldn't matter. They are the big name in the PAC12 south and the biggest national name in the league. It doesn't matter if us beating them is more important to us than the game is to them, they should be our target.

Just like with Nebraska if we beat USC a few times, if we cost them bowl position or rankings, if we take something from them a few times they will come to hate us too. Still not to match ND and UCLA but who cares. If beating them is fun and important for us I don't care what they think.

The Fuskers cost us shots at 2 national championships-we should have played for the title in 2001 (Yeah, Miami would have drubbed us probably but still) and in 1994 (I don't think you can argue that Colorado and Nebraska weren't the two best teams in the sport that year and probably would have played twice had the BCS or CFP existed that year). That's what makes a rivalry. The only games that had that kind of excitement among this fanbase as NU did in the Pac 12 era were probably the last two in 2016 and the CCG that season. We need to be playing them four times a decade at least in my opinion.

Mtn-I don't think Iowa fans hate NU like we do. They've won the last three games against the Fuskers by 70+ points. We're the only rival they've got right now.

 

[BUFFering]

We're the closest thing NU has to a rival, and vice versa. I think we need to be playing them as often as feasibly possible-look at how jacked the fanbase was for that game LY, and look at ticket prices for this year-RG and Bill Moos will probably announce additional games after we beat them again on September 7.

Only because we've both been orally cleaning the bottom of the pool for the last decade.

 

[Highlander]

By the way, we don't have a conference making strategic moves that will create shockwaves as the other conferences fight to maintain their best position. We have UConn, that aggressively moved up over the last decade to become an AAC G5 school and their admin didn't have the guts to see through some financial losses in the near term and are now dropping back down. Note this is an AAC G5 school dropping back down, not a P5 ACC school.

What exactly have we been talking about for now 194 posts?

 

[leftybuff]

By the way, we don't have a conference making strategic moves that will create shockwaves as the other conferences fight to maintain their best position. We have UConn, that aggressively moved up over the last decade to become an AAC G5 school and their admin didn't have the guts to see through some financial losses in the near term and are now dropping back down. Note this is an AAC G5 school dropping back down, not a P5 ACC school.

What exactly have we been talking about for now 194 posts?

You act as if this is your first off-season on AB.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Going to 16 could increase the pot, though.

With 9 conference games, that's also an increase of 18 games of inventory to sell.

I think it would also open the door to a 2-round conference championship. That adds 2 semi-final game "events" that would be worth as much money as a regular season major rivalry game or matchup between 2 ranked conference teams -- maybe more.

Yes, the pie divides into 2 more slices. But the pie also gets bigger. The question is whether the pie gets enough bigger.

CFB ratings have started to decline and attendance is also declining. This suggests that interest in CFB is waning and could be age bound to older generations (less valuable to advertisers). Im a financial contrarian.

On the flip side these are still highly valuable assets even if slightly depreciated. And there is always someone out there willing to pay either for domination or for breaking into the business.

Ultimately, Im doubtful that the current conference change very much going forward because I dont think the money is there.

 

[MtnBuff]

CFB ratings have started to decline and attendance is also declining. This suggests that interest in CFB is waning and could be age bound to older generations (less valuable to advertisers). Im a financial contrarian.

On the flip side these are still highly valuable assets even if slightly depreciated. And there is always someone out there willing to pay either for domination or for breaking into the business.

Ultimately, Im doubtful that the current conference change very much going forward because I dont think the money is there.

Another reason to see programs drop a level, not rise a level. The pie isn't getting bigger, no reason for those at the top to cut it into more slices.

The top programs will continue to generate the revenue, those who are going to lose are the ones already on the lower margins. At some point they start admitting that they aren't in the same game and decide they can accomplish their goals at a lower level of competition without having to sink the millions of dollars a year into trying to maintain the appearance of being a top program.

 

[Buffnik]

CFB ratings have started to decline and attendance is also declining. This suggests that interest in CFB is waning and could be age bound to older generations (less valuable to advertisers). Im a financial contrarian.

On the flip side these are still highly valuable assets even if slightly depreciated. And there is always someone out there willing to pay either for domination or for breaking into the business.

Ultimately, Im doubtful that the current conference change very much going forward because I dont think the money is there.

Every sport is struggling with ratings and attendance. It’s a big part of why I believe in the regional model where fans can drive to road games and have more reason to care.

I think we had it right with the conferences around 1990 — just needed to put the eastern independents into a conference that included Penn State.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Every sport is struggling with ratings and attendance. It’s a big part of why I believe in the regional model where fans can drive to road games and have more reason to care.

I think we had it right with the conferences around 1990 — just needed to put the eastern independents into a conference that included Penn State.

Long live the SWC!

 

[PAC MAN]

Every sport is struggling with ratings and attendance. It’s a big part of why I believe in the regional model where fans can drive to road games and have more reason to care.

I think we had it right with the conferences around 1990 — just needed to put the eastern independents into a conference that included Penn State.

I miss those days too.

Long live the SWC!

Long live the Big 8!

 

[ahoelsken]

Every sport is struggling with ratings and attendance. It’s a big part of why I believe in the regional model where fans can drive to road games and have more reason to care.

I think we had it right with the conferences around 1990 — just needed to put the eastern independents into a conference that included Penn State.

Every sport is struggling with attendance and ratings because its so easy to watch whatever team you're interested in now with streaming platforms and what not. As far as something like the NFL-I'd rather watch that on the couch than go to a Bronco game. Same thing with the RMS-stopped attending that in person several years ago.

 

[CarolinaBuff]

A few random thoughts after browsing thru this thread:

- CU to the B1G would be tremendous for the program financially and it makes alot of sense since we were previously in a conference with schools from the states of Nebraska and Iowa. So the fit is there. Unfortunately I don't think it would ever happen.
- I never understood the idea that the B1G would be interested in KU. Their football program is trash and more importantly has minimal interest, and football drives these conference realignments unless you're a school in a major market like Rutgers, Maryland, or BC. And those 3 were bad moves for the B1G and ACC respectively.
- The idea of Army to the AAC doesn't make any sense. If Army and Navy are in the same division then the Army-Navy game would have to be moved up at least 2 weeks and that game has a special place on the calendar the week after the CCG's. And what if you put them in opposite divisions with the possibility of them meeting twice in a season? Not happening.
- Adding anyone to the Pac12 short of UT/OU is a futile effort. UNLV, UNM, KU, SDSU, etc. add nothing.

 

[ahoelsken]

A few random thoughts after browsing thru this thread:

- CU to the B1G would be tremendous for the program financially and it makes alot of sense since we were previously in a conference with schools from the states of Nebraska and Iowa. So the fit is there. Unfortunately I don't think it would ever happen.
- I never understood the idea that the B1G would be interested in KU. Their football program is trash and more importantly has minimal interest, and football drives these conference realignments unless you're a school in a major market like Rutgers, Maryland, or BC. And those 3 were bad moves for the B1G and ACC respectively.
- The idea of Army to the AAC doesn't make any sense. If Army and Navy are in the same division then the Army-Navy game would have to be moved up at least 2 weeks and that game has a special place on the calendar the week after the CCG's. And what if you put them in opposite divisions with the possibility of them meeting twice in a season? Not happening.
- Adding anyone to the Pac12 short of UT/OU is a futile effort. UNLV, UNM, KU, SDSU, etc. add nothing.

Agree with you on point four right now-I think UNLV makes a ton of sense once the Raiders get to Vegas, and they will become a Pac 12 member at some point. As far as Army (or anybody for that matter) to the AAC, assuming the NCAA treats the AAC the same way as the Big 12 and allows for them to play a championship game with less than 12 members, theres no need for them to add anyone. As far as KU to the B1G......KjSU and how bad their football program is makes them not worth it. I do think if the Big 12 falls apart somebody would go grab them just to get that basketball program.

On CU to the Big 10-I actually think its not as far fetched as you do, and frankly I think thats the reason why Dr. Phil got the high level post with the conference. They can definitely add money and eyeballs by adding CU and the Denver market, and I think a move involving CU is the only reasonable way the B1G gets to 16 honestly.

 

[BerkeleyBuff]

Agree with you on point four right now-I think UNLV makes a ton of sense once the Raiders get to Vegas, and they will become a Pac 12 member at some point. As far as Army (or anybody for that matter) to the AAC, assuming the NCAA treats the AAC the same way as the Big 12 and allows for them to play a championship game with less than 12 members, theres no need for them to add anyone. As far as KU to the B1G......KjSU and how bad their football program is makes them not worth it. I do think if the Big 12 falls apart somebody would go grab them just to get that basketball program.

On CU to the Big 10-I actually think its not as far fetched as you do, and frankly I think thats the reason why Dr. Phil got the high level post with the conference. They can definitely add money and eyeballs by adding CU and the Denver market, and I think a move involving CU is the only reasonable way the B1G gets to 16 honestly.

Personally I think the B1G would pursue Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas (if one of the other two came) before CU. I think they'd also desire a couple ACC schools more but their long term GOR makes that more problematic.

 

[BerkeleyBuff]

A few random thoughts after browsing thru this thread:

- CU to the B1G would be tremendous for the program financially and it makes alot of sense since we were previously in a conference with schools from the states of Nebraska and Iowa. So the fit is there. Unfortunately I don't think it would ever happen.
- I never understood the idea that the B1G would be interested in KU. Their football program is trash and more importantly has minimal interest, and football drives these conference realignments unless you're a school in a major market like Rutgers, Maryland, or BC. And those 3 were bad moves for the B1G and ACC respectively.
- The idea of Army to the AAC doesn't make any sense. If Army and Navy are in the same division then the Army-Navy game would have to be moved up at least 2 weeks and that game has a special place on the calendar the week after the CCG's. And what if you put them in opposite divisions with the possibility of them meeting twice in a season? Not happening.
- Adding anyone to the Pac12 short of UT/OU is a futile effort. UNLV, UNM, KU, SDSU, etc. add nothing.

I believe the major thought with KU was they're in an adjacent state (the B1G has stated that matters), are AAU (B1G definitely cares), and have a tremendous basketball program (which is actually beneficial for the conference network, seeing as basketball provides much more content for said networks than football given the greater number of games, and KU is a basketball program people would gladly tune in for).

 

[ahoelsken]

I believe the major thought with KU was they're in an adjacent state (the B1G has stated that matters), are AAU (B1G definitely cares), and have a tremendous basketball program (which is actually beneficial for the conference network, seeing as basketball provides much more content for said networks than football given the greater number of games, and KU is a basketball program people would gladly tune in for).

The only thing we don't have that KU does have is that basketball program. We bring far more eyeballs than Kansas does-when we're really good (or when its Nebraska week), we get attention locally-and a ton of it.

 

[BerkeleyBuff]

The only thing we don't have that KU does have is that basketball program. We bring far more eyeballs than Kansas does-when we're really good (or when its Nebraska week), we get attention locally-and a ton of it.

Ya I'm not denying any of that. If they were going to take either CU or KU alone I'd say that's at least a 50/50 situation. I more think KU would be more likely because the B1G surely has OU very high on their wish list, and OU would be very likely to promote KU as the #16.

 

[ahoelsken]

Ya I'm not denying any of that. If they were going to take either CU or KU alone I'd say that's at least a 50/50 situation. I more think KU would be more likely because the B1G surely has OU very high on their wish list, and OU would be very likely to promote KU as the #16.

Wrong. If you want Texas or Oklahoma, you've gotta take a little brother to go with them. Another thing that makes us more attractive to the B1G if they wanted to.

 

[Creebuzz]

CU makes sense for three of the five power conferences. It’s nice to be in that position.

 

[Not Sure]

I would HATE being in the B1G. Yuck.