Realignment Attractiveness Score

The networks that are willing to pay this kind of money for media rights [going forward] are consolidating their assets. They increase their profit margins by consolidating the valuable assets and dropping the leaches. WF/BC/SMU are leaches that no one wants to pay for. [The B12 got lucky, imo, in that the P12 leadership was inept at the time or they might still exist instead of the B12]. You are not understanding the current and shifting dynamic in college football. UH needs to win big immediately and often or we will be in the same boat in ~5 years.

Anyway, if these realignment “attractiveness” scores mean anything, they mean ONE thing.

That we are NOT attractive to the B1G.

In other words, IF the B1G adds a Texas team (not a valid assumption to make, in my view), then the only “attractive” Texas schools, realignment wise, would be UT and aTm. Check out their “attractiveness” scores.

So if the B1G can’t get one of them…they’ll have little interest in TX and won’t take anyone at all. Not having a TX school has never prevented them from being the biggest money and most stable conference, so there’s little reason to believe that they necessarily “need” a TX school of any kind to stay on top. They’ll only add a TX school if it is “attractive” enough, and based on these “metrics,” (using the term loosely), only UT and aTm would be attractive enough.

I’ll admit, it’s a pretty chart. But we don’t know how much weighting is given to each category and you have two totally subjective categories: Key Bonus Factors and Key Risks.

Giving Stanford that high of rating makes me seriously consider the methodology they’re using. But it is a pretty chart.

Stanford greater than FSU and Clemson is right on! Big 12 Commish was dumb. Water Polo titles must carry a lot of weight.

“Key Bonus Factors” and “Key Risks” = totally subjective way to make the chart read how the author wants. In other words, it’s pretty much useless as a measure of anything, despite his claim of it being “quantitative.” :laughing:


Yeah, if Stanford were truly the second most “realignment attractive” school in the ACC, then why weren’t they more attractive to the P3, and why did they only get partial shares in the ACC?

There’s probably something wrong with the methodology, given that.

if you haven’t noticed…this chart was put together by Altimore…he is a PAC homer so of course, he is going to over value the former PAC schools.


Please allow me to laugh my a— off at ASU’s score. They literally suck at everything that matters. Have forever, and probably will in the future.

1 Like

Florida State-ACC negotiation to set up next round of realignment (

Here is the key issue:

The actual grant of rights is deliberately vague, and the ACC’s attorneys correctly point out that it does not stipulate any financial penalties should a school try to break the agreement.”

But by saying “it is simply a commercial possibility” that a school could buy back its rights, the ACC’s legal team seems to invite a negotiation. No one to this point had admitted publicly that the GOR could be bought out, even though everyone suspected it could be. This moves the parties closer to the brass-tacks discussion of what it might actually cost…”

The Houston vs Duke numbers look great. Can you imagine having Duke in the Big 12? Come on ACC implode already!

1 Like

…and it is skewed. The newest BIG 12 have been playing power conference sports for years. This is our second season. Way too early to make rankings for U of H, UCF and even Cinci.

It’s not up to the ACC schools in respect of their fate in the ACC

It’s up to ESPN, who shows no confidence

Hence…why we will shoot up the “brand” rankings very quickly.

The Duke/UH game is a perfect example and the more big games, featuring UH, they will see that UH viewers are watching as much, if not more than the opponents.


We are indeed the sleeping giant. Our upside has no ceiling. It is as simple as keeping the home grown greater Houston area talent and we will win the National Championship. Miami did it so can we.



1 Like

The good thing about being in Houston is that the whole city can hop on the bandwagon when we are good. Some of my friends that went to other schools want me to take them to UH basketball games.

1 Like


Whole city gets behind UH
TV ratings skyrocket
Skyscrpaers are lighted with UH
Light Rail cars are decked in UH decals

People continue to underestimate how high of a ceiling we have.

The TWO times one of our Basketball/ Football teams played in a National Championship game, the City of Houston turned the Coogs into a National Phenomenon…and that was in the early 80’s!


Houston has always gotten behind UH, when doing well i.e,when Coach beat the mighty Michigan State Spartan 37-7 in 1967, city went crazy came out to greet them at the airport .

1 Like

Houston is a bandwagon city unfortunately.

I remember the days of the Astros games before 2014 only attended by people with corporate tickets and families of kids singing the anthem.

Same with the Rockets after Harden left.

1 Like

Pipe dream lol

Houston doesn’t get behind UH unless they’re winning, and even in those circumstances it’s not always consistent

UH is not “Houston’s University”. It’s just a university that happens to be in Houston and majority attended by Houston natives.

Houston is home to UH, UT, A&M, Baylor, TCU, OU, OSU, etc etc etc

1 Like