this will only apply to football and that all the other sports will remain unchanged as they are now. What if the Big Ten and/or SEC want to apply this to all sports? Given that Title IX is the elephant in the room and not going away, they might decide to add a few non-valuable football schools to make sure the interests of their other sports would still be protected if they break away from the NCAA or remaining DI schools for all sports.

No, make it the goal. How would it look for ESPN to just say to the ACC, "sorry but you are not worth as much now and your schools, without the TV support they have had will all diminish. We don't need you, not even Clemson, FUS, Miami, heck we may not even need ND."

All businesses attempt to increase market share and exposure. There is a reason why MLB, NFL, NHL continue to expand and look for new markets, as opposed to contract. It pulls in overall viewership and fans. If you are in too few markets, your overall monetization opportunity declines, and you will eventually see far less distributions. However, the problem in NCAAF is that you have conferences that are financially managed independently - and these conferences are more interested in the well being of solely their teams, rather than the product as a whole. To make matters worse, within these exclusive group of teams in a conference you have a flawed equal-rev share model, so the less valuable entities take a higher percentage than they deserve. Should Vanderbilt really get the same as Alabama, or Wake Forest the same as FSU? Tickets and merchandise helps provide some difference, but TV is now the really big contributor now. If teams that draw greater audiences were compensated based on their actual draw/ratings, you would have less movement. While it puts smaller market teams at a disadvantage, they should be at a disadvantage because they don't inject the same value, and they are more easily replaceable. Irregardless of the league, VT shouldn't be compensated on television revenue the same as Ohio State or Texas, but VT shouldn't be compensated the same as Wake Forest or Syracuse. VT may be okay because we are in the middle (or upper middle), but if you're FSU or Texas then you start to inquire about alternatives to increase your pay. At some point in the future if TV contracts shrink, you'll potentially see another breakaway where the Northwesterns and Vanderbilts get left behind or have to take a smaller piece of the pie.

It's not about market share, it's revenue per school. Very few schools left grow the pie enough to justify expansion.

This isn't rocket science. I do agree there are very few teams remaining that can increase the average distribution TODAY, but in the long run any sport that is over-regionalized or too exclusive will adversely impact its long term revenue. The Big10 and SEC are grabbing today's dollars that were undeniably built from a very wide-spread interest across many valuable teams participating. If you diminish the importance of those teams and grab their dollars, then you don't get to magically produce those dollars in the future when you disenfranchised a significant portion of your audience.

I never watch the B10 network or any big 10 football - this will not change with USC-UCLA. If I could eliminate B10 network from cable package I would. Also I do not watch much SEC football except playoffs and only if an ACC school is playing would rather watch exciting mid-major game than ALA-GA beating a bunch of nothings

I’d love for them to come out of left field with something like a five year “study” on head injuries that bans football at the two schools. Magically lifted if the deal gets canceled of course. They have done pressure like this on the past, for Baylor to the big 12 and us to the acc. If those schools leave alone there is a major problem left behind for the other two.

I understand bragging rights and all for conferences and the desire to be the best. But this Big 10/SEC pissing match does also seem to be intended to kill the competition. The Big 10 felt like they had to add USC/UCLA to counter the SEC UT/OU. Now the SEC seems poised to add more to counter the Big 10 by raping the other conferences. In effect, they have (or appear to soon be) all but killed the ACC/Big12 and Pac12. This can't be a good thing. Not just for athletics, but for higher educated in general at these schools. Tech definitely improved in all ways after the Beamer/Vick years. I'm not naive, so I get that they are trying to maximize their revenue and they frankly don't give a crap about the other schools that will be significantly impacted. If this was a pro league, whatever. However, there is a lot riding on this mixup (not just athletics) and it's frustrating to see schools cannibalize others.

What damages college football will eventually damage the SEC and BIG. When people outside those conferences stop caring and watching their games the TV media will decline. ACC fans also watch SEC games. Same with all other conferences fans. If they get turned off to SEC football , that will cause pain.

will likely result in massive anti-trust lawsuits. ESPN and Fox along with the SEC and Big 10 would be the defendents. Also, it would probably bring congress into the battle. I am sure that ESPN, Fox, SEC, and Big 10 are rorally aware of this and will tread carefully. Congress would be ore trouble to them than the lawsuts.

So I don’t think that’ll happen

schools and hence have 0 interest. I'm more of a Big 10 guy. Father is an OSU grad and I went to Purdue for grad school. I would be thrilled to see the SEC implode under it's own strength, but can't see that happening.

...and I'm proud to say I still haven't watched one minute of programming on that network. The only team I try to watch is Virginia Tech. I'll occasionally watch another ACC game, but I really don't have the desire to watch anyone else. If we go to two mega conferences and VT is left out, I'll cut back my college sports channels. Whatever streaming service I end up with, I will not pay a penny for either the SECN or B1XN. I'll cancel my services before paying them any more money for sports.

the majority of fans just pick one of the Big or SEC to root for. Every area of the country with adequate TVs (by their calculations) is pretty well covered by the P2 at least regionally

I’d couch it more as collateral damage than seeking to damage. The existence of Pac means little to the B1G. B1G just wants more money and to do so they took USC/UCLA. College football has been moving toward NFL every year. Look no further than the introduction of the playoffs and inevitable expansion. All that brings in viewers who aren’t just alums of schools obsessed with how things were done in 1985. If the state of Virginia is left out of big time football, some hardcore VT/UVA fans may tune out but there are millions of others in the state available to watch hyped big-time football served in a manner they are used to with NFL.

to go. But we'll see how that works out for them.

They have to go a bit beyond what makes dollars and sense to satisfy the political aspect. How much beyond 16 remains to be seen, but I doubt either conference goes beyond 24. I think for Tech, if the number is closer to 24, we 'll be in B1G and SEC where we end up an average to slightly above average program that seldom challenges for a conference title and never gets the elusive natty. If the number is closer to 16, we'll continue on as an ACC contender, frequently winning conference championships, but getting curb stomped in national tournaments in Olympic sports, and never making CFP. Again, we'll never get a natty.