Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

If you can't take a joke, that's on you.

That's why I don't get married.

Yeah, that's why. 

I guess this is our de facto Realignment thread, so I'll put this here:




https://twitter.com/TomFornelli/status/1544357573830361090?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1544357573830361090%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.surlyhorns.com%2Fboard%2Findex.php%3Fapp%3Dcoremodule%3Dsystemcontroller%3Dembedurl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FTomFornelli%2Fstatus%2F1544357573830361090

I guess this is our de facto Realignment thread, so I'll put this here:


https://twitter.com/TomFornelli/status/1544357573830361090?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1544357573830361090%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.surlyhorns.com%2Fboard%2Findex.php%3Fapp%3Dcoremodule%3Dsystemcontroller%3Dembedurl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FTomFornelli%2Fstatus%2F1544357573830361090

The best thing for the strongest remaining teams in both the B12 and PAC would be to get rid of the dead wood by creating a new conference made up of the strongest without the weaker members.

Note:
Strong and weak as used herein refer to media rights money generation not on field/court performance.

The fundamental problem with the B12 from day one was that they had too much dead wood. As originally formed from the B8 and the ashes of the SWC, they were made up of:

• 4 TX schools (UT, aTm, TxTech, Baylor): They only needed two, UT and aTm
• 2 OK schools, they only needed one, OU
• 2 KS schools, they only needed one, Kansas
• The #2 school in Iowa, not needed
• Mizzou
• Colorado
• Nebraska

The seven (UT, aTm, OU, KS, Mizzou, CO, and UNL) should have then looked to expand their footprint into fast-growing non-P5 areas (probably NM, UT, NV) or tried to raid nearby P5 areas (AZ). That could have created a durable league.

A B12 raid of the Pac or some kind of merger will face the same situation as the B12 faced, too much dead wood.

None of the following should realistically be in even a quasi-P5 league:

• Iowa State, #2 school in Iowa
• KSU, #2 school in KS
• OkSU, #2 school in OK
• OrSU, #2 school in OR
• WSU, #2 school in WA
• Baylor
• TxTech
• TCU
• Houston

OkSU might be strong enough for what is left.

Maybe a Texas school or two: Houston makes some sense because Houston is a large media market and not all that close to Austin or College Station. TxTech, similarly, is REALLY far from UT-A and aTm.



I'm thinking the combined league without cast-offs is:

• Zona
• ASU
• California
• Stanford
• Colorado
• Utah
• BYU
• Oregon
• Washington
• Kansas
• WVU
• UCF

Then maybe:

• Houston
• TxTech
• Cincinnati
• NM or NMST
• UNLV or Nevada
• Air Force

That is a total of 12-18 schools all on relatively equal footing. They'll probably lose at least some to the B1G, SEC, or possibly the ACC but there wouldn't be any better leagues to jump to other than those two (maybe 3).

Baylor and Oklahoma State are better at football than about half of your Pac12 improved Big12.  NM or NM State shouldn't even be in the conversation.

Baylor and Oklahoma State are better at football than about half of your Pac12 improved Big12.  NM or NM State shouldn't even be in the conversation.

Honestly, nobody making these decisions cares. It isn't about being "good at football", it is about being good at generating media rights MONEY.

The complication, and I don't know how to solve it, is that the past ratings were based on a different situation. When Texas, Oklahoma, aTm (formerly) etc were in the B12, their fans had a reason to want to know how the other B12 schools looked.

I don't know how much things will change going forward. Maybe in the past you (and Texas fans generally) watched other B12 games when the Longhorns were not playing and now will you watch the more local B12 teams or your new SEC league-mates?

Californians and West Coasters generally just not caring about CFB is definitely an issue, I agree. My list is guesswork, if I were an actual AD, I think I'd ask multiple networks for estimates and work off of that.

Yeah it's true, and I don't know how to adjust for that variable.

But what we do know, is that Californians already aren't watching ASU or Utah or Colorado or Stanford or Berkeley now, and there's no reason to expect them to do so in the future.

So there may be a lower floor for ratings for an Oklahoma State game, once Texas and OU leave the B12, but we already know where the ceiling is for PAC games, and it's extremely low.