B1G, Pac12, ACC in Discussions about Forming Alliance

[krup]

Yea but that's never a worry for the B10 because they have enough big brands and followings, that's a worry of the ACC and PAC12. Like I said the power dynamic doesn't change with regards to these 3 because it's just inherent in the individual conferences' make up.

As far the playoff, I've read this from a couple reporters, didn't verify though, but with proposed rules that came out a couple months ago and expansion to 12 the B10 not the SEC would have had the most teams qualify over these last whatever many years. So even when people say limit the number teams per conference that can get in, they do it with the intention of limiting the SEC, but if what those reporters said is true, it could actually hurt the B10 too.

IMO expansion isn't about survival of the B10 which is what I feel some of you think, it's about being out front and creating a super premium sports property. A scheduling alliance actually isn't antithetical to that idea for the near term and can actually help it come to fruition when you have the hard data to decide which teams add the most value when playing B10 schools. It can be like trial period or audition for some of them so to speak on the way to expansion. Since it's seen as the B10 lending a hand to weaker conferences then make it 2 for 1 on the conference level and everyone is benefitting to the proportion they should and if expansion is deemed appropriate in the future you know exactly the schools to add.

The B1G doesn’t have enough brands when they are measured against the SEC with 6-8 and possibly growing.

And those B1G teams that “would” have made a 12 team playoff in the past? Good luck with that when the schedules are compared in the future.

A “trial period” is not worth giving up the advantage of having your contracts on the open market soon. Potential partners would be glad to tell you which additions they would value.

All I know is that two conferences took the “wait and see” approach to conference reshuffling that you advocate and both of them (Big East and B12) are dead as power football conferences.

 

[krup]

I think that you have to consider what Rutgers could and hopefully will become - the first Big 10 football powerhouse in the New York media market. No one has ever seen what the result of that would be. Smart business people don’t look at how things are right now - they can envision what the future will look like. Insert Wayne Gretzky quote here.

Scarlet Jerry

If a single superconference became a reality, they aren’t adding Rutgers on potential, they are building a conference of brands and expecting that (like a pro conference) they get viewership from areas that don’t even have a team because they are the elite level of their particular sport (and, given that they would be the top level of football played when the NFL doesn’t have games, they are probably right).

 

[OntheBanks]

I switched from FIOS tv to YouTube TV. It's fine for the most part. User friendliness compared to a cable box is a little lacking (last channel navigation or going directly to a channel etc..) but it's not a deal breaker. No more cable box rentals which is the main reason for the switch. On one tv I have the ethernet cable hardwired to an Apple TV and channel changing is instantaneous no different than a cable box. On the other tvs it's wireless through firesticks or cube. There you have a minimal buffering with changing channels but not a big deal. If you have a cube don't hardwire it, it limits the speed coming through (100 mbps which is still plenty mind you) which I didn't realize at first. Wireless was actually faster than hardwire as far as a fire cube is concerned...go figure lol.

I hardly ever use the 'live' tab. I 'record' all shows I want to watch and set them up in 'Library'. Shows stay linked to your account for 9 months. I can still go back and watch some of our basketball games from last winter. I have it set up to 'record' all RU football and Men's & Women's Basketball. I didn't do it but you could 'record' all NCAA tournament games with one click. I know I did that for all B1G football games last year. Nothing's recorded, just linked to a recording in the cloud that all users can view. I love it.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

The B1G doesn’t have enough brands when they are measured against the SEC with 6-8 and possibly growing.

And those B1G teams that “would” have made a 12 team playoff in the past? Good luck with that when the schedules are compared in the future.

A “trial period” is not worth giving up the advantage of having your contracts on the open market soon. Potential partners would be glad to tell you which additions they would value.

All I know is that two conferences took the “wait and see” approach to conference reshuffling that you advocate and both of them (Big East and B12) are dead as power football conferences.

The B10 has plenty of brands OSU, Michigan, PSU, Nebraska, MSU, Wisconsin, Iowa are all second tier or top tier brands. SEC Alabama, UF, LSU, Auburn, Georgia, Texas, OU so about the same maybe you want to add A&M an Tenn...still I'd say about the same.

Over time the B10 will still be getting multiple teams into the playoff if expanded to 12...so not worried about that. Everyone can't be a winner in the SEC and some teams will get pushed down the standings.

As far as BE and B12 collapsing that has nothing to do with waiting and seeing and everything to do with their inherent makeups. When we added Maryland many here thought the ACC was going to collapse and was weak and I said nope the B12 is still the weaker one over the long haul because of its narrow geographic focus (part of why I like the idea of a national conference) and not all ships going in the same direction. There really isn't a move the B12 could have made that was actually realistic that could have saved them long term. Were they going to poach teams from the ACC or PAC12? Very unlikely any of them would have seen the B12 as a destination without some other precipitating event. The BE and B12 were what they were and their inherent makeups weren't stable. That's not the B10.

And you misunderstand, I don't advocate anything as far as scheduling alliance or waiting and seeing. I think expansion is good but the money has to be there and you assume it is and I don't. The money will be there for 14 B10 teams in this next tv contract. I don't know if the money will be there for 18-20 teams in this next B10 contract. I don't have the desperation some of you do, that's the difference not that I advocate for scheduling alliance and I aslo can see how it can benefit an expansion for future.

If Fox (and most likely partners needed), NBC, CBS, ESPN, Amazon or whomever can show the B10 the money for the next contract and those extra teams then expand. I'm all for it. I've been saying it right from the start of this news....expand on the way to 24 with the cream from both the west and eventually the east. Some here think that was a crazy idea and I say you know lots of ideas are crazy until they've been done.....12, 14, 16 teams were crazy at one time too. That being said the money has to be there and none of us know for sure if it is or not for that many teams. So given that circumstance I look for other ways around and how a scheduling alliance can be helpful still in reaching the ultimate goal of expanding to that 20 and then 24.

Like I say it's all speculation but I do try to be realistic in terms of restrictions, confines, limits of what's actually happening in the real world....as in is there enough money from the networks right now for that many teams and if not then okay how can this scheduling alliance be useful at present to reach that ultimate goal and enhance us a little in the meantime.

 

[Doctor Worm]

Indeed it is!

I wonder how everyone would react if USC and Notre Dame announce they are moving to the SEC in 2025 as well?

Didn’t see Texass and Oklahoma making the move did you? What makes any of us think that USC and ND couldn’t do the same thing?

Then what?

If Notre Dame chooses to give up its independent status, it is contractually bound to the ACC.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

I hardly ever use the 'live' tab. I 'record' all shows I want to watch and set them up in 'Library'. Shows stay linked to your account for 9 months. I can still go back and watch some of our basketball games from last winter. I have it set up to 'record' all RU football and Men's & Women's Basketball. I didn't do it but you could 'record' all NCAA tournament games with one click. I know I did that for all B1G football games last year. Nothing's recorded, just linked to a recording in the cloud that all users can view. I love it.

I do watch live tv at times and record a ton of things too even if I have the slightest inkling I "could" watch it lol. No limit dvr haha...used to have FIOS multi room dvr could only record 2 at a time and obviously limited storage but it was a local hard drive on one of the boxes not the cloud so that's why. Pausing to see things without graphics covering or no slow mo can kinda suck for sports (as one poster laments here lol) at times but not a deal breaker for me either.

 

[krup]

The B10 has plenty of brands OSU, Michigan, PSU, Nebraska, MSU, Wisconsin, Iowa are all second tier or top tier brands. SEC Alabama, UF, LSU, Auburn, Georgia, Texas, OU so about the same maybe you want to add A&M an Tenn...still I'd say about the same.

Over time the B10 will still be getting multiple teams into the playoff if expanded to 12...so not worried about that. Everyone can't be a winner in the SEC and some teams will get pushed down the standings.

As far as BE and B12 collapsing that has nothing to do with waiting and seeing and everything to do with their inherent makeups. When we added Maryland many here thought the ACC was going to collapse and was weak and I said nope the B12 is still the weaker one over the long haul because of its narrow geographic focus (part of why I like the idea of a national conference) and not all ships going in the same direction. There really isn't a move the B12 could have made that was actually realistic that could have saved them long term. Were they going to poach teams from the ACC or PAC12? Very unlikely any of them would have seen the B12 as a destination without some other precipitating event. The BE and B12 were what they were and their inherent makeups weren't stable. That's not the B10.

And you misunderstand, I don't advocate anything as far as scheduling alliance or waiting and seeing. I think expansion is good but the money has to be there and you assume it is and I don't. The money will be there for 14 B10 teams in this next tv contract. I don't know if the money will be there for 18-20 teams in this next B10 contract. I don't have the desperation some of you do, that's the difference not that I advocate for scheduling alliance and I aslo can see how it can benefit an expansion for future.

If Fox (and most likely partners needed), NBC, CBS, ESPN, Amazon or whomever can show the B10 the money for the next contract and those extra teams then expand. I'm all for it. I've been saying it right from the start of this news....expand on the way to 24 with the cream from both the west and eventually the east. Some here think that was a crazy idea and I say you know lots of ideas are crazy until they've been done.....12, 14, 16 teams were crazy at one time too. That being said the money has to be there and none of us know for sure if it is or not for that many teams. So given that circumstance I look for other ways around and how scheduling alliance can helpful still in reaching the ultimate goal of expanding to that 20 and then 24.

Like I say it's all speculation but I do try to be realistic in terms of restrictions, confines, limits of what's actually happening in the real world....as in is there enough money from the networks right now for that many teams and if not then okay how can this scheduling alliance be useful at present to reach that ultimate goal and enhance us a little in the meantime.

Out at Nebraska still being a brand.

Nebraska is one of the main examples out there to scare schools into going along with the SEC.

They went from being Alabama to being irrelevant in 20 years, and some of the schools currently near the top could be just as vulnerable if they didn’t get a seat.

 

[Scarlet16e2]

If Notre Dame chooses to give up its independent status, it is contractually bound to the ACC.

Just like Texas was contractually bound to the B12.

 

[RURM85]

Super Conference? Pure hypothetical and speculation, made for click bait and message board fantasy posters. If there one day is a Super Conference who knows how many schools are involved. Could be 24 schools or mabye a 100 schools.

ESPN and other media distribution outlets want one thing. Compelling content and the current structure of college football can improve in that area such as an Alliance between 3 top Conferences with a scheduling agreement to match up some upper level schools.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Out at Nebraska still being a brand.

Nebraska is one of the main examples out there to scare schools into going along with the SEC.

They went from being Alabama to being irrelevant in 20 years, and some of the schools currently near the top could be just as vulnerable if they didn’t get a seat.

I always address your points then you make with regards to power dynamic (ACC, PAC12, B10), playoff spots etc..but then you just go and say out on mine or don't bother to rebut or address the points I bring up to rebut yours.

Nebraska is a brand they're just not winning a lot after Pelini. What has Texas done though? USC recently too. Washington and Oregon too which I like (and guessing you probably do too) but they've had some handful of years of success but after or before that? People like UNC, UVA but what have they done as well outside a handful of years....how about FSU same for them, nothing really even the end of the Bowden years? Nebraska has the potential to be as good or better than most of those programs and frankly if the B10 does expand Cali recruiting could be a nice help for them possibly. Regardless though, it's still a brand just like Texas, USC, FSU even if the performance hasn't been there in awhile.

 

[Doctor Worm]

Just like Texas was contractually bound to the B12.

No, not at all alike.

 

[Ridge 22]

Just like Texas was contractually bound to the B12.

No, not even close to the same thing. Your post is simply misinformation. 4 years vs 15 years of GOR's are not even close to being equivelant.

 

[Scarlet16e2]

No, not at all alike.

What penalties does Notre Dame face if they break their contract to join the ACC rather than some other conference? No one seems to know. For all we know it is meaningless.

 

[Scarlet16e2]

No, not even close to the same thing. Your post is simply misinformation. 4 years vs 15 years of GOR's are not even close to being equivelant.

Notre Dame has not given an GOR to the ACC for football, which is all that matters.

 

[Ridge 22]

Notre Dame has not given an GOR to the ACC for football, which is all that matters.

They are locked into joining the ACC if they join a conference. And my understanding is that they would forego their media rights if they left, just like the other ACC schools

 

[Doctor Worm]

Notre Dame has not given an GOR to the ACC for football, which is all that matters.

What Notre Dame has given the ACC is a contractual pledge that they will not join any football conference other than the ACC. So if ND tries to join the SEC, the ACC sues to prevent them from doing so. In all likelihood, they win the suit.

 

[Scarlet16e2]

They are locked into joining the ACC if they join a conference. And my understanding is that they would forego their media rights if they left, just like the other ACC schools

lol They have their own media contract with NBC. The ACC has no rights to football.

 

[Scarlet16e2]

What Notre Dame has given the ACC is a contractual pledge that they will not join any football conference other than the ACC. So if ND tries to join the SEC, the ACC sues to prevent them from doing so. In all likelihood, they win the suit.

A contract without teeth is worthless. Just saying.

 

[MADHAT1]

lol They have their own media contract with NBC. The ACC has no rights to football.

If the ACC could get ND's FB program to join, I wouldn't be supriesed to hear that the ACC to have full TV rights to their OOC FB games as incentive

 

[krup]

I always address your points then you make with regards to power dynamic (ACC, PAC12, B10), playoff spots etc..but then you just go and say out on mine or don't bother to rebut or address the points I bring up to rebut yours.

Nebraska is a brand they're just not winning a lot after Pelini. What has Texas done though? USC recently too. Washington and Oregon too which I like (and guessing you probably do too) but they've had some handful of years of success but after or before that? People like UNC, UVA but what have they done as well outside a handful of years....how about FSU same for them, nothing really even the end of the Bowden years? Nebraska has the potential to be as good or better than most of those programs and frankly if the B10 does expand Cali recruiting could be a nice help for them possibly. Regardless though, it's still a brand just like Texas, USC, FSU even if the performance hasn't been there in awhile.

Nebraska is not comparable to the others you mentioned because their state is not populous and they aren’t in a particularly good recruiting area. In addition, while they have crazy in state fan support, when they were huge in the 90’s they didn’t attract the numbers of casual fans from other areas that their rivals did because of their playing style.

There have been quite a few once prominent college football schools that fell off a cliff over time. I thought getting Frost as coach was their last, best chance at reclaiming some glory and that appears to have not worked out. Their brand will continue to weaken as young people who think the 90’s was ancient history become more of a share of the college football fan base.

 

[krup]

Super Conference? Pure hypothetical and speculation, made for click bait and message board fantasy posters. If there one day is a Super Conference who knows how many schools are involved. Could be 24 schools or mabye a 100 schools.

ESPN and other media distribution outlets want one thing. Compelling content and the current structure of college football can improve in that area such as an Alliance between 3 top Conferences with a scheduling agreement to match up some upper level schools.

ESPN has actually used the same strategy for 15 years once they realized their revenue model was at risk and they started having to worry about what they were spending.

They are willing to still spend big money on the onscreen talent and sports rights they think are worth it, and figure out ways to not pay for parts they think aren’t worth it.

They pay Mike Greenberg big money and don’t renew Mike Golic. They move Miami and others to the ACC so they don’t have to pay UConn. USF, and others (and just did the same in the Big12).

Cutting the power conferences down from 65 schools to 35, 25, whatever isn’t a result of their long term strategy. It is one of the main parts of their long term strategy.

 

[RURM85]

ESPN has actually used the same strategy for 15 years once they realized their revenue model was at risk and they started having to worry about what they were spending.

They are willing to still spend big money on the onscreen talent and sports rights they think are worth it, and figure out ways to not pay for parts they think aren’t worth it.

They pay Mike Greenberg big money and don’t renew Mike Golic. They move Miami and others to the ACC so they don’t have to pay UConn. USF, and others (and just did the same in the Big12).

Cutting the power conferences down from 65 schools to 35, 25, whatever isn’t a result of their long term strategy. It is one of the main parts of their long term strategy.

Thanks for predicting the future of college athletics. You’ll be proven wrong as usual.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Nebraska is not comparable to the others you mentioned because their state is not populous and they aren’t in a particularly good recruiting area. In addition, while they have crazy in state fan support, when they were huge in the 90’s they didn’t attract the numbers of casual fans from other areas that their rivals did because of their playing style.

There have been quite a few once prominent college football schools that fell off a cliff over time. I thought getting Frost as coach was their last, best chance at reclaiming some glory and that appears to have not worked out. Their brand will continue to weaken as young people who think the 90’s was ancient history become more of a share of the college football fan base.

I couldn't find a ton on their tv ratings but did find 3 of their games in the last 5-6 years hit that 4M+ plus mark...two were against Iowa and one against OSU. Some other ones were below 1 and some 1-2M but couldn't tell the frequency of each and obviously time slots, BTN, FS1 etc..all play into that too. They were a ranked team mostly under Pelini and that's up to 2014. I still think they have enough of a following to draw viewers when doing okay.

The whole PAC12 conference within the league had 5 4M club games I think in that last 5-6 year period. So Nebraska has as almost as many as the whole PAC12. You'd want Oregon and Washington I'm guessing as I said above and I don't see Nebraska as much different as them as far as potential for tv viewers probably more if they could actually do well.

Their brand isn't what it used to be but it's still a brand and always has the potential to be revitalized. The longer they go without being ranked and what not yes they can fade but they were ranked as recently in the 2009-2014 period so they have some time to go before deteriorating into nothingness. They don't need to win big but they need to be ranked and relevant more consistently but for now IMO it's still brand especially when there are people in and around my age (40s) that remember them in their hey day and potentially would watch more if they perform better.

Regardless, this isn't the point of the discussion. The point is the B10 has got plenty of brands and drawing power for tv which is the particular point here. If the B10 didn't have brands like the SEC they wouldn't get rich tv deals. 55 4M plus games for the SEC vs 49 for the B10. If you have that alliance more potential to keep up with the SEC in terms of those kind of games especially in a 2 for 1 on a conference level. They can fall behind the SEC if they do nothing but they won't get blown out of the water the way the PAC12/ACC are which some of you seem to think and that's the point I'm making.

I advocate expanding if the money is there now. If the networks say the money is there for you 14 at this price but nope the money isn't there for you 18-20 at that price then what?

Speaking of Nebraska some quotes from their AD. Like I said if networks say the money is there.... expand, if not then have to think of other work arounds for now.

From the article:

» Conference realignment is coming. Conference alliances don’t seem far behind. Alberts alluded to the rumored Pac-12/Big Ten/ACC alliance Tuesday. He said every school wants to make sure they have a “seat at the table” for the discussion surrounding how college sports will operate in the future and that “multiple timelines exist” for the implementation of realignment and alliances.

“And it’s not comfortable to say,” Alberts said, “but the (TV) networks have a very significant say in what’s happening.”

https://omaha.com/sports/huskers/fo...cle_f95af756-ff89-11eb-8e7f-6b36b12204ae.html

 

[Doctor Worm]

A contract without teeth is worthless. Just saying.

Not really. In fact, not at all.

I can have a contract with you which says "You must do X, and if you don't, this is what happens." Or, I can have a contract with you which simply says "You must do X" and leaves it at that.

Let's say you don't do X.

In the first case, the resolution is clearcut. In the second it is not. But that doesn't mean the contract is worthless. It means I sue you and a jury decides. Or it means we reach a settlement. But you sure as hell ain't walking away scot free.

 

[RuSnp]

Nebraska is not comparable to the others you mentioned because their state is not populous and they aren’t in a particularly good recruiting area. In addition, while they have crazy in state fan support, when they were huge in the 90’s they didn’t attract the numbers of casual fans from other areas that their rivals did because of their playing style.

There have been quite a few once prominent college football schools that fell off a cliff over time. I thought getting Frost as coach was their last, best chance at reclaiming some glory and that appears to have not worked out. Their brand will continue to weaken as young people who think the 90’s was ancient history become more of a share of the college football fan base.

I remember in the early 2000s people thought Alabama after a 4 win season and a bunch of mediocre 6 win seasons was a team of the past.

 

[Scarlet16e2]

Not really. In fact, not at all.

I can have a contract with you which says "You must do X, and if you don't, this is what happens." Or, I can have a contract with you which simply says "You must do X" and leaves it at that.

Let's say you don't do X.

In the first case, the resolution is clearcut. In the second it is not. But that doesn't mean the contract is worthless. It means I sue you and a jury decides. Or it means we reach a settlement. But you sure as hell ain't walking away scot free.

Maybe, but I'm not convinced that this is anything more than a "gentleman's agreement". Who knows?

 

[fsg2_rivals]

I always address your points then you make with regards to power dynamic (ACC, PAC12, B10), playoff spots etc..but then you just go and say out on mine or don't bother to rebut or address the points I bring up to rebut yours.

Nebraska is a brand they're just not winning a lot after Pelini. What has Texas done though? USC recently too. Washington and Oregon too which I like (and guessing you probably do too) but they've had some handful of years of success but after or before that? People like UNC, UVA but what have they done as well outside a handful of years....how about FSU same for them, nothing really even the end of the Bowden years? Nebraska has the potential to be as good or better than most of those programs and frankly if the B10 does expand Cali recruiting could be a nice help for them possibly. Regardless though, it's still a brand just like Texas, USC, FSU even if the performance hasn't been there in awhile.

I just assumed he didn't want to have to go back and defend his assertion that the B1G is somehow analogous to the Big East or Big 12 if it doesn't go full acquisition mode.

Not a task I'd want to take on, either.

 

[Mr. Magoo1]

What Notre Dame has given the ACC is a contractual pledge that they will not join any football conference other than the ACC. So if ND tries to join the SEC, the ACC sues to prevent them from doing so. In all likelihood, they win the suit.

Exactly. ND will do whatever they please. $$ talks…and they could change their name from the politically incorrect Fighting Irish to the Redskins…and get away with it.

 

[TommyGunn_rivals157283]

Alliances are for those who are not in a market leadership position but strive to be. The B1G is still one of the bullies on the block and should not be in an alliance. It’s time to bloody up a weakling and steal their lunch money. Time to act.

 

[rucoe89]

I don't dispute that Stanford and Cal have bigger followings than Rutgers. The point is their followings are not large enough to add value to a TV contract. That's what you're looking for, a school that will increase the pie for everyone. A strong following is not enough. None of these schools are top 30 in football revenue. That's what it's probably going to take. Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, USC, Oregon, Washington no-brainers. Most everybody else? Nope.
Here's my source from June 2021. Seems legit to me.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ot...ams-new-revenue-figures-for-all-65/ar-AALuIbn

Helpful link. Thanks for sharing. What that link highlights for me is that Rutgers is not guaranteed a seat at any table that settles in next few years. I don't think any conference is safe. If teams within the SEC, B1G, PAC, and ACC decide that even with consolidation, there are too many "free riders" to share with, more change will come quickly. We may see that the max number of teams to split revenue between is a smaller number such as 32. This list highly very quickly who is likley to be cast aside regardless of conference, or location, they are in today.

 

[rucoe89]

ESPN has actually used the same strategy for 15 years once they realized their revenue model was at risk and they started having to worry about what they were spending.

They are willing to still spend big money on the onscreen talent and sports rights they think are worth it, and figure out ways to not pay for parts they think aren’t worth it.

They pay Mike Greenberg big money and don’t renew Mike Golic. They move Miami and others to the ACC so they don’t have to pay UConn. USF, and others (and just did the same in the Big12).

Cutting the power conferences down from 65 schools to 35, 25, whatever isn’t a result of their long term strategy. It is one of the main parts of their long term strategy.

Willing to bet that we are only in the middle of ESPN end game of going to 32 of the top teams in a Saturday quasi NFL that they control all rights too. And yes, even the SEC and B1G are not safe. This will come down to cherry picking the top 32 that are most likely to generate the highest streaming and over the air revenue. Rutgers, unfortunately, would not be part of the 32 as ESPN will focus on blue bloods.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Willing to bet that we are only in the middle of ESPN end game of going to 32 of the top teams in a Saturday quasi NFL that they control all rights too. And yes, even the SEC and B1G are not safe. This will come down to cherry picking the top 32 that are most likely to generate the highest streaming and over the air revenue. Rutgers, unfortunately, would not be part of the 32 as ESPN will focus on blue bloods.

If thats gonna happen that’s gonna happen no move by the B10 now changes that…dead weight would be dropped from all conferences regardless and none of the big brands have to worry they will always have a seat at the table.

But as I said above not so sure that happens because I think academic snobbery of admins and admins not wanting to be pro in all aspects at a lot of these schools might not want that and it’s not as if they’re going “hungry” if you’re the B10 or SEC. Lot of money will still be made even if you’re not one big conference. On top of which just like the I say now in the SEC everyone can’t be a winner, well in a 32 team conference there will be a lot of teams that were winners that turn into losers. How many schools will want that?

Not saying it won’t happen but wouldn’t take it as a forgone conclusion. There are things that stand in the way.

 

[Doctor Worm]

If thats gonna happen that’s gonna happen no move by the B10 now changes that…dead weight would be dropped from all conferences regardless and none of the big brands have to worry they will always have a seat at the table.

But as I said above not so sure that happens because I think academic snobbery of admins and admins not wanting to be pro in all aspects at a lot of these schools might not want that and it’s not as if they’re going “hungry” if you’re the B10 or SEC. Lot of money will still be made even if you’re not one big conference. On top of which just like the I say now in the SEC everyone can’t be a winner, well in a 32 team conference there will be a lot of teams that were winners that turn into losers. How many schools will want that?

Not saying it won’t happen but wouldn’t take it as a forgone conclusion. There are things that stand in the way.

Change "academic snobbery" to "academic integrity" and I think you've got it.

 

[rucoe89]

If thats gonna happen that’s gonna happen no move by the B10 now changes that…dead weight would be dropped from all conferences regardless and none of the big brands have to worry they will always have a seat at the table.

But as I said above not so sure that happens because I think academic snobbery of admins and admins not wanting to be pro in all aspects at a lot of these schools might not want that and it’s not as if they’re going “hungry” if you’re the B10 or SEC. Lot of money will still be made even if you’re not one big conference. On top of which just like the I say now in the SEC everyone can’t be a winner, well in a 32 team conference there will be a lot of teams that were winners that turn into losers. How many schools will want that?

Not saying it won’t happen but wouldn’t take it as a forgone conclusion. There are things that stand in the way.

No question not a foregone conclusion, but if you are ESPN, a 32 team super conference with the cream of the crop NCAA teams (from each conference) would be the next best thing to the NFL with the added bonus of asserting control over it. You are set on Thursday, Friday, Saturday content from mid August to mid January.

You can also see those 32 teams leave the NCAA if the money is right and set up a new set of rules/governing body, of which even ESPN would have a seat at the table. As for college presidents, I can guarantee you that for some of these schools the Benjamins will ultimately get the loudest voice and floor space, particularly as schools get more desperate for non-governmental funding. Again, not a foregone conclusion it will happen. But also not a foregone conclusion it won't happen. None of us know.

 

[RuSnp]

No question not a foregone conclusion, but if you are ESPN, a 32 team super conference with the cream of the crop NCAA teams (from each conference) would be the next best thing to the NFL with the added bonus of asserting control over it. You are set on Thursday, Friday, Saturday content from mid August to mid January.

You can also see those 32 teams leave the NCAA if the money is right and set up a new set of rules/governing body, of which even ESPN would have a seat at the table. As for college presidents, I can guarantee you that for some of these schools the Benjamins will ultimately get the loudest voice and floor space, particularly as schools get more desperate for non-governmental funding. Again, not a foregone conclusion it will happen. But also not a foregone conclusion it won't happen. None of us know.

Possible. Remember the blue bloods of soccer tried something similar to what you suggest. Fan backlash helped in scuttling it but I think the main reason it didn't happen (yet) is the governing bodies warned that they would ban players from participating in the World Cup and other competitions. Would they actually? Who knows. But I don't see what similar hammer the NCAA has.

 

[graystork]

Helpful link. Thanks for sharing. What that link highlights for me is that Rutgers is not guaranteed a seat at any table that settles in next few years. I don't think any conference is safe. If teams within the SEC, B1G, PAC, and ACC decide that even with consolidation, there are too many "free riders" to share with, more change will come quickly. We may see that the max number of teams to split revenue between is a smaller number such as 32. This list highly very quickly who is likley to be cast aside regardless of conference, or location, they are in today.

Agreed. If this goes to a superconference with the 30 best teams, Rutgers doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell. However, if this comes down to an expanded SEC vs the Big Ten and the money machine schools of the Pac 12 and maybe a few ACC schools, I think RU does fine. I don't see the SEC kicking out Vandy or Mississippi State nor do I see the Big Ten dumping Northwestern, Purdue or Indiana. My hope is that the Big Ten and Pac 12's academic reputations keep the AAU designation relevant. If so Rutgers is fine. If this becomes just the richest 30 it's over.

 

[Doctor Worm]

Possible. Remember the blue bloods of soccer tried something similar to what you suggest. Fan backlash helped in scuttling it but I think the main reason it didn't happen (yet) is the governing bodies warned that they would ban players from participating in the World Cup and other competitions. Would they actually? Who knows. But I don't see what similar hammer the NCAA has.

The fan backlash question is interesting. For instance, let's say Michigan is selected for the super conference. Would their fans/donors rebel at losing their traditional rivalry with Michigan State? Or the Little Brown Jug game with Minnesota? I'm guessing no, but who knows.

 

[RUTGERS95]

there won't be a super conference given the political side of things will kill it

what will happen is 16 team conferences, possibly 18

 

[HeavenUniv.]

https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/...llenger-college-football-playoff-show-qa.html

 

[rucoe89]

there won't be a super conference given the political side of things will kill it

what will happen is 16 team conferences, possibly 18

Doubt it. If Texas or Oklahoma governments can't stop doubt any others can. Pay off enough politicians and get your way.