Left Behind: A Quick Dose Of Post Big 12 Reality

[Okie State 3,821]

Kentucky, Mizzou, South Carolina are powerhouse programs.

[NorthLoop 14,218]

6 hours ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

In another 10-15 years Nebtaska will be viewed like Minnesota to HS recruits.

"They won a bunch of NCs? Really? Was this before the internet? "

I think we're easily at that point already and I'm not joking. 

[billfromlaketravis 11,520]

The Big Ten is living on Chicagoland TV sets and a thirsty partner in FOX. They’ve worked out one of the greatest deals in history. You always want to be first. 

[Wade 464]

2 hours ago, Sandbagging Steve said:

B1G survives on having 3 of the 5 juggernaut fanbases in college football: tOSU, Michigan, Penn State. They just added the 6th most important (simply because of their location and history) in USC and they are chasing the last juggernaut in Notre Dame. The bottom half of their conference is complete bread. They make $ because the juggernaut teams have to play the bread.

SEC is loaded top to bottom. The only reason the $$$ is close between the two conferences remains the fact that the SEC only has one of the 5 juggernaut fanbases: TEXAS. But they then almost have EVERYONE right under those top 6 teams that are worthy of anything. They are LOADED. Vanderbilt is the only team that is not competitive and Mississippi State is the only other team that doesn't bring some kind of value financially.

Cripes, you are becoming insufferable.  You have a good foundation of college football history, but you are not looking at the whole picture.  It's a business. It's been pointed out countless times in public articles for years, and posted by knowledgeable folks on here and other forums that research dollars associated with conference affiliation dwarf tv rights.  The bottom half of the B1G probably generates a shit-ton more dollars for tOSU (not in the upper half academically) than the other way around.  No way USC and UCLA made such a drastic move over $40M annual increase in TV revenues.  Huge reason would be the research dollars they could share in that the SEC cannot even come close to.

[Sandbagging Steve 982]

32 minutes ago, Wade said:

Cripes, you are becoming insufferable.  You have a good foundation of college football history, but you are not looking at the whole picture.  It's a business. It's been pointed out countless times in public articles for years, and posted by knowledgeable folks on here and other forums that research dollars associated with conference affiliation dwarf tv rights.  The bottom half of the B1G probably generates a shit-ton more dollars for tOSU (not in the upper half academically) than the other way around.  No way USC and UCLA made such a drastic move over $40M annual increase in TV revenues.  Huge reason would be the research dollars they could share in that the SEC cannot even come close to.

What does any of this have to do with competition on the field? That's the ongoing discussion. The best athletic conference. There's a poster here trying to make the claim that the B1G is a better football conference. I'm not sure how anyone could come close to making that claim. SEC has only one football program that isn't competitive.

I have no idea how you pulled the BTAA into this but every B1G alum/fan I've ever met brings it up before even saying "hello". There are many schools with plenty of research dollars outside the BTAA.

I stated earlier UNC will be about the BTAA vs. ESPN. ESPN will probably have to pull some strings to win that one. That is one program both conferences want that the BTAA can make the difference. UNC fits both profiles and is a geographical fit for both. BTAA could make the difference. In fact, I don't think any other program up for grabs will come down to BTAA. UVA isn't that important to the SEC.

It's obvious you're a B1G alum. No issues, I love fans/alums from other teams, but this is a Texas board. B1G is not a good fit until everyone comes together under one umbrella. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of programs in the B1G that are similar to Texas, but not enough of them and it's just not the best geographical fit. We have better options for us.

If the BTAA was the only thing that matters, Texas, USC, UNC and other schools would already be in the B1G. A long time ago. Yet, Texas not only selected the SEC, but has tried to select the SEC and PAC multiple times in its past history. There's way more to this than sending your athletics program to a conference for academic reasons.  If that's your reasoning, it could turn into a disaster. That's not how you make business decisions. You have alums and fans that donate to the university and they better be happy with the results.

Not all those bottom feeders rank higher than tOSU academically either. It's not hard to find good academics with better athletics than a few of them.

UCLA is 50 million in debt. USC is struggling. Both programs never wanted to be in the PAC in the first place. USC/UCLA made a football decision. There's not one legit journalist/reporter who would tell you otherwise.

B1G is lucky for Urban's national recruiting at tOSU or they would be in a world of hurt on the field. B1G doesn't have any programs other than Urban's recruiting machine that is competing for the playoffs. It's saving the conference from complete embarrassment right now. It's a great conference, but trying to sell it as a better football or athletic conference than the SEC is a major reach.

USC should eventually help solve some of those issues. They will bring speed to the B1G.

Cheers

 

[nnm 36,480]

13 hours ago, Sandbagging Steve said:

 

SEC is loaded top to bottom.

You lost all credibility with this aggy mentality. Every year, SECX3 has ‘Bama, one or two other top-flight teams, a bunch of mediocre teams, and some bottom feeders. Guess what that sounds like? Every other conference. The myth of SECX3 top-to-bottom superiority is purely a media driven narrative, gobbled up by aggy.

The SECX3 move is the right one because the B12 is dying, and has been for 15 years. But not because it has mythical abilities to bestow uniform athletic excellence on all its members. 

[closetohumping 17,453]

12 hours ago, Wade said:

Cripes, you are becoming insufferable.  You have a good foundation of college football history, but you are not looking at the whole picture.  It's a business. It's been pointed out countless times in public articles for years, and posted by knowledgeable folks on here and other forums that research dollars associated with conference affiliation dwarf tv rights.  The bottom half of the B1G probably generates a shit-ton more dollars for tOSU (not in the upper half academically) than the other way around.  No way USC and UCLA made such a drastic move over $40M annual increase in TV revenues.  Huge reason would be the research dollars they could share in that the SEC cannot even come close to.

Pretty sure 40m a year and the thought that northwestern is making at least double what they make is a factor

 

Stanford and cal aren’t a part of the btaa and they’re more highly regarded than any B1G school

Edited July 4, 2022 by closetohumping

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

On 7/3/2022 at 4:38 PM, Satchel said:

I think you know given the chance, Texas would have picked the B1G over the Sec, whose football is no longer boring because it adopted an offensive style of play popularized by the conference being abandoned by virtually everybody.

Would not surprise me as our school leaders have made a lot of dipshit moves with respect to athletics.

[Zeus 6,107]

On 7/3/2022 at 10:55 PM, Sandbagging Steve said:

B1G survives on having 3 of the 5 juggernaut fanbases in college football: tOSU, Michigan, Penn State. They just added the 6th most important (simply because of their location and history) in USC and they are chasing the last juggernaut in Notre Dame. The bottom half of their conference is complete bread. They make $ because the juggernaut teams have to play the bread.

SEC is loaded top to bottom. The only reason the $$$ is close between the two conferences remains the fact that the SEC only has one of the 5 juggernaut fanbases: TEXAS. But they then almost have EVERYONE right under those top 6 teams that are worthy of anything. They are LOADED. Vanderbilt is the only team that is not competitive and Mississippi State is the only other team that doesn't bring some kind of value financially.

Other than these jokers, yeah the bottom of the SEC shits on the bottom of the B1G

[Zeus 6,107]

On 7/3/2022 at 11:26 PM, Okie State said:

Kentucky, Mizzou, South Carolina are powerhouse programs.

Those three teams you listed would beat Maryland/Rutgers/Illinois/Northwestern/Nebraska/Indiana...  

But yeah the SEC isn't "loaded top to bottom" it's just the SEC top is superior to the B1G top and the SEC bottom is also superior to B1G's bottom. 

Only way to find out is have more games between the two leagues. First got to shake out the final Power 2 conferences. 

[Okie State 3,821]

Those three teams you listed would beat Maryland/Rutgers/Illinois/Northwestern/Nebraska/Indiana...  
But yeah the SEC isn't "loaded top to bottom" it's just the SEC top is superior to the B1G top and the SEC bottom is also superior to B1G's bottom. 
Only way to find out is have more games between the two leagues. First got to shake out the final Power 2 conferences. 

I don't think there's any doubt the SEC is superior to B1G.

[closetohumping 17,453]

18 minutes ago, Okie State said:

4 hours ago, Zeus said:

Those three teams you listed would beat Maryland/Rutgers/Illinois/Northwestern/Nebraska/Indiana...  
But yeah the SEC isn't "loaded top to bottom" it's just the SEC top is superior to the B1G top and the SEC bottom is also superior to B1G's bottom. 
Only way to find out is have more games between the two leagues. First got to shake out the final Power 2 conferences. 

I don't think there's any doubt the SEC is superior to B1G.

Agree:

Bama

Georgia

Texas

Florida

LSU

Oklahoma

Aggy

Auburn

 

I don't think anyone can match the above but let's try with the B1G

tOSU

USC

Michigan

Penn ST

Wisconsin

Michigan 

UCLA?

Minnesota?

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1,291]

34 minutes ago, Okie State said:

4 hours ago, Zeus said:

Those three teams you listed would beat Maryland/Rutgers/Illinois/Northwestern/Nebraska/Indiana...  
But yeah the SEC isn't "loaded top to bottom" it's just the SEC top is superior to the B1G top and the SEC bottom is also superior to B1G's bottom. 
Only way to find out is have more games between the two leagues. First got to shake out the final Power 2 conferences. 

I don't think there's any doubt the SEC is superior to B1G.

Yeah, the ACC is probably a better comparison. National championship-tier quality at the top, garbage at the bottom. The B1G is better, but the gulf is a lot narrower than B1G and SEC.

[Bullneck 19,185]

 

 

[Satchel 6,938]

2 hours ago, Okie State said:

6 hours ago, Zeus said:

Those three teams you listed would beat Maryland/Rutgers/Illinois/Northwestern/Nebraska/Indiana...  
But yeah the SEC isn't "loaded top to bottom" it's just the SEC top is superior to the B1G top and the SEC bottom is also superior to B1G's bottom. 
Only way to find out is have more games between the two leagues. First got to shake out the final Power 2 conferences. 

I don't think there's any doubt the SEC is superior to B1G.

Why do you think SC and UCLA petitioned the B1G for membership instead of the Sec?

[chainsaw 9,872]

1 hour ago, Bullneck said:

 

 

They should bring in Hawaii at this point

[camel at sea 589]

On 7/4/2022 at 1:17 AM, Wade said:

Cripes, you are becoming insufferable.  You have a good foundation of college football history, but you are not looking at the whole picture.  It's a business. It's been pointed out countless times in public articles for years, and posted by knowledgeable folks on here and other forums that research dollars associated with conference affiliation dwarf tv rights.  The bottom half of the B1G probably generates a shit-ton more dollars for tOSU (not in the upper half academically) than the other way around.  No way USC and UCLA made such a drastic move over $40M annual increase in TV revenues.  Huge reason would be the research dollars they could share in that the SEC cannot even come close to.

Being in the B1G doesn't somehow turn on a federal research spigot for its members. Nebraska's place in the R&D pecking order, nationally, is still pretty much in exactly the same place it was 15 years ago.  

If Northwestern and Purdue left the Big 10, even if they were kicked out, those two universities would continue doing research with Michigan, Wisconsin, etc.  Football is not the tie that binds that whole thing together.  

[chainsaw 9,872]

27 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

Being in the B1G doesn't somehow turn on a federal research spigot for its members. Nebraska's place in the R&D pecking order, nationally, is still pretty much in exactly the same place it was 15 years ago.  

If Northwestern and Purdue left the Big 10, even if they were kicked out, those two universities would continue doing research with Michigan, Wisconsin, etc.  Football is not the tie that binds that whole thing together.  

maybe for them yankees it ain't YEE HAW

[TKthunder2 4,993]

3 hours ago, closetohumping said:

Agree:

Bama

Georgia

Texas

Florida

LSU

Oklahoma

Aggy

Auburn

 

I don't think anyone can match the above but let's try with the B1G

tOSU

USC

Michigan

Penn ST

Wisconsin

Michigan 

UCLA?

Minnesota?

Iowa > Minnesota 

[LTtxfan 49,312]

 

[LTtxfan 49,312]

Klatt

 

[Al_4_ISU 12,473]

17 hours ago, Okie State said:

21 hours ago, Zeus said:

Those three teams you listed would beat Maryland/Rutgers/Illinois/Northwestern/Nebraska/Indiana...  
But yeah the SEC isn't "loaded top to bottom" it's just the SEC top is superior to the B1G top and the SEC bottom is also superior to B1G's bottom. 
Only way to find out is have more games between the two leagues. First got to shake out the final Power 2 conferences. 

I don't think there's any doubt the SEC is superior to B1G.

Outside of Ohio State, the Big 10 isn't superior on the field to the Big 12.  Their position in this world is based on having large rabid fanbases in major media markets.

The SEC has that, AND on field success.

[Vertigo 20,297]

4 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Outside of Ohio State, the Big 10 isn't superior on the field to the Big 12.  Their position in this world is based on having large rabid fanbases in major media markets.

The SEC has that, AND on field success.

That is why it would such a big deal to get Notre Dame. They have been in numerous playoffs and usually play a pretty tough schedule to get there. With ND in the fold, you would have 4 viable candidates to make it to the playoff every year in tOSU, Michigan, ND, and USC.

I would also love to see an automatic bid for the B12 and the survivor of the PAC/ACC in an expanded 8 or 12 team playoff. 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, LTtxfan said:

Klatt

 

LOLz.  Stronger governance... The postseason as it is currently constructed sucks ass.

If we get better non-con games than I'm cool with that.  We'll see.

I expect less propaganda from Klatt.  That's full bore swallow with a nut-tickler.

Edited July 6, 2022 by slorch

[Al_4_ISU 12,473]

10 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

That is why it would such a big deal to get Notre Dame. They have been in numerous playoffs and usually play a pretty tough schedule to get there. With ND in the fold, you would have 4 viable candidates to make it to the playoff every year in tOSU, Michigan, ND, and USC.

I would also love to see an automatic bid for the B12 and the survivor of the PAC/ACC in an expanded 8 or 12 team playoff. 

This is really all most of us left here really want.  Every thing else is gravy.

[Zeus 6,107]

5 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Outside of Ohio State, the Big 10 isn't superior on the field to the Big 12.  Their position in this world is based on having large rabid fanbases in major media markets.

The SEC has that, AND on field success.

Michigan just went to the playoff

Nobody else from the (old) big12 has other than blowU

The big 10 also plays in a league with officials that allow defense to be played so people take them serious. 

[Al_4_ISU 12,473]

2 minutes ago, Zeus said:

Michigan just went to the playoff

Nobody else from the (old) big12 has other than blowU

The big 10 also plays in a league with officials that allow defense to be played so people take them serious. 

That's only because the committee refused to allow it.  2014 Baylor or TCU were just as good as 2021 Michigan.

The Big 10's credibility has fuck all to do with anything that happens on the field.  Most Big 10 fans will admit that.  It has to do with being the most popular conference in Chicago, Minneapolis, Detroit, Cleveland, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, Philly, etc.

[Uncle Nate 2,097]

2 hours ago, slorch said:

LOLz.  Stronger governance... The postseason as it is currently constructed sucks ass.

If we get better non-con games than I'm cool with that.  We'll see.

I expect less propaganda from Klatt.  That's full bore swallow with a nut-tickler.

Joel thinks everyone wants to see only the elites play, like an NFL light. They think we are all going to gravitate to the product they force on us.  I think they’ve forgotten what makes CFB fandom unique. 
 

I think excluding 2/3 -3/4 of the college football fan bases out there is short-sided and risky. If they limit this to 32 or so teams, I think they will end up destroying the value of the product. 
 

 

[mdmost 43,011]

1 minute ago, Uncle Nate said:

Joel thinks everyone wants to see only the elites play, like an NFL light. They think we are all going to gravitate to the product they force on us.  I think they’ve forgotten what makes CFB fandom unique. 
 

I think excluding 2/3 -3/4 of the college football fan bases out there is short-sided and risky. If they limit this to 32 or so teams, I think they will end up destroying the value of the product. 
 

 

I think Klatt can point to the Fox and ESPN numbers on what people actually tune in for to support his argument. There's a reason Fox went to Big Noon with mostly Ohio State games and it's done pretty well for them. Same reason Fox chose Texas and Bama when they got the chance. Even though we'll get destroyed in that game, people will tune in to watch. It's not like people are going to have difficulty finding the team they support. It's either on Fox, ESPN, ESPN+, or the conference/school network. 

[Zeus 6,107]

4 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Joel thinks everyone wants to see only the elites play, like an NFL light. They think we are all going to gravitate to the product they force on us.  I think they’ve forgotten what makes CFB fandom unique. 
 

I think excluding 2/3 -3/4 of the college football fan bases out there is short-sided and risky. If they limit this to 32 or so teams, I think they will end up destroying the value of the product. 
 

Everyone bitched about the bowl setup and no playoff - so they made a chicken shit 4 team playoff. The small playoff pool made it where the bowls don't matter as much, neither do the conferences (other than the SEC). The SEC got even stronger so the B1G has been fighting to keep up, and thus now you have two super conferences forming. The South East and the North West.

If they would've expanded the playoff to capture a bunch more teams and just call those games the bowl games it would've probably kept some of the conferences from realignment. 

Texas is leaving the big 12 so whatever else happens I don't really fucking care. Just don't want to be playing games in shitholes like Waco and Lubbock anymore.

[Vertigo 20,297]

5 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Joel thinks everyone wants to see only the elites play, like an NFL light. They think we are all going to gravitate to the product they force on us.  I think they’ve forgotten what makes CFB fandom unique. 
 

I think excluding 2/3 -3/4 of the college football fan bases out there is short-sided and risky. If they limit this to 32 or so teams, I think they will end up destroying the value of the product. 
 

 

Klatt is a realist. To some degree he is correct. Better games with bigger brands more often, and the two conferences are likely to come up with some from of rules of engagement in terms of recruiting and/or NIL that they can self police at the conference level. Will that work? Doubtful, but it will be better than what is in place now in terms of governance. 

[Guest]

Just now, mdmost said:

I think Klatt can point to the Fox and ESPN numbers on what people actually tune in for to support his argument. There's a reason Fox went to Big Noon with mostly Ohio State games and it's done pretty well for them. Same reason Fox chose Texas and Bama when they got the chance. Even though we'll get destroyed in that game, people will tune in to watch. It's not like people are going to have difficulty finding the team they support. It's either on Fox, ESPN, ESPN+, or the conference/school network. 

Once it goes to the Big 2, meh.  Not sure I'll tune in. Who the fuck am I kidding?  I'll watch as I always have. 

 

   Very anxious to see what becomes of the 8 conference games and the November cupcake, as has been the SEC tradition for some time now. As a general fan of the game I want to see that changed.  That's a root cause of scoffing at "increased governance."  They can't even get( or want?) consistent schedule structures across the leagues.

Would also love for the playoff to be expanded and get rid of the shenanigans/ exclusivity/ bullshit of the selection process.  The current set up is bullshit, but they don't care that it is.

Yeah, Joel is spouting the living fuck out of the company line.  He gets paid to do that.  He's better when he speaks Joel Klatt.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

Klatt is a realist. To some degree he is correct. Better games with bigger brands more often,

It was possible before this.  He knows it.  I know it.  You know it.

[camel at sea 589]

5 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

Klatt is a realist. To some degree he is correct. Better games with bigger brands more often, and the two conferences are likely to come up with some from of rules of engagement in terms of recruiting and/or NIL that they can self police at the conference level. Will that work? Doubtful, but it will be better than what is in place now in terms of governance. 

I also think  he believes that everyone currently in the P5 will be included in whatever CFB turns into.  

[camel at sea 589]

2 minutes ago, slorch said:

Once it goes to the Big 2, meh.  Not sure I'll tune in. Who the fuck am I kidding?  I'll watch as I always have. 

 

   Very anxious to see what becomes of the 8 conference games and the November cupcake, as has been the SEC tradition for some time now. As a general fan of the game I want to see that changed.  That's a root cause of scoffing at "increased governance."  They can't even get( or want?) consistent schedule structures across the leagues.

Would also love for the playoff to be expanded and get rid of the shenanigans/ exclusivity/ bullshit of the selection process.  The current set up is bullshit, but they don't care that it is.

Yeah, Joel is spouting the living fuck out of the company line.  He gets paid to do that.  He's better when he speaks Joel Klatt.

I think "the Big 2" will eventually be 30+ schools each and it will break away from the NCAA.  If there were 36 under the (primarily) FOX umbrella and 36 under the primarily Disney umbrella, that covers the entire P5.  You could make it 40 and 40 if necessary and it still works.

You could set that up so that CFB media deals were all under one umbrella, you could put teams into NFL style divisions of traditional rivals/geographic peers, a pre-set schedule rotation, a playoff system that makes sense, etc.  

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

I think "the Big 2" will eventually be 30+ schools each and it will break away from the NCAA.  If there were 36 under the (primarily) FOX umbrella and 36 under the primarily Disney umbrella, that covers the entire P5.  You could make it 40 and 40 if necessary and it still works.

You could set that up so that CFB media deals were all under one umbrella, you could put teams into NFL style divisions of traditional rivals/geographic peers, a pre-set schedule rotation, a playoff system that makes sense, etc.  

and if it just becomes minor league NFL, I'm sorry but the bands and pageantry only go so far.  I don't watch g-league in the NBA.  I only go to minor league baseball 1-2 times per year and wouldn't watch it on TV.  I watch 100-110 Astros games per season, at a minimum.

I like the mix of haves and have-nots.  If it's just minor leagues, again, that's not going to drive my interest.  I'll watch em when they make the NFL.  Two leagues of haves that'll all be ing playing on Sundays eventually is not necessarily "better" IMHO.

[Uncle Nate 2,097]

2 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

I think "the Big 2" will eventually be 30+ schools each and it will break away from the NCAA.  If there were 36 under the (primarily) FOX umbrella and 36 under the primarily Disney umbrella, that covers the entire P5.  You could make it 40 and 40 if necessary and it still works.

You could set that up so that CFB media deals were all under one umbrella, you could put teams into NFL style divisions of traditional rivals/geographic peers, a pre-set schedule rotation, a playoff system that makes sense, etc.  

But what would motivate the haves from doing that? It would, in their opinion, dilute the amount of the pie they would receive. It’s all about money now. 
 

I see the Big 2 limiting this to 32-40 teams max. It’s all about greed at this point. 
 

I love your scenario above, but the realist in me says it won’t happen. The college football I love is dead and has been replaced with NFL light. 

[Hank Chinaski 6,315]

47 minutes ago, slorch said:

and if it just becomes minor league NFL, I'm sorry but the bands and pageantry only go so far. 

Agreed. The sport is moving in a direction that is less regional, more corporate, where programs are built based largely on NIL/payroll, where all players are free agents every year, etc. It’ll likely get more sterile and less passionate. I guess with all the money the sport generates, this was inevitable. Some people will like it more, I guess. I don’t think I will be one of them.

[Horn80 6,131]

Just form a super conference of 16 teams.  aggy won’t make the cut.

[Vertigo 20,297]

12 minutes ago, Horn80 said:

Just form a super conference of 16 teams.  aggy won’t make the cut.

That would be the most apocalyptic meltdown in the history of micropenis rage induced meltdowns. 

[Okie State 3,821]

I'm all for it. Top 16 programs fuck off and the rest of us can go back to something more interesting. Do it.

[camel at sea 589]

8 hours ago, Uncle Nate said:

But what would motivate the haves from doing that? It would, in their opinion, dilute the amount of the pie they would receive. It’s all about money now. 
 

I see the Big 2 limiting this to 32-40 teams max. It’s all about greed at this point. 
 

I love your scenario above, but the realist in me says it won’t happen. The college football I love is dead and has been replaced with NFL light. 

If you make the field too small, you change the product too much.  Then it really is Triple A baseball.  That's a massive financial risk for the people holding the purse strings.  But if the top tier still has 70+ schools, it still feels like the same sport to the casual fans.  That's a much safer risk to pay for and you don't invoke fan/media backlash.  

[camel at sea 589]

9 hours ago, slorch said:

and if it just becomes minor league NFL, I'm sorry but the bands and pageantry only go so far.  I don't watch g-league in the NBA.  I only go to minor league baseball 1-2 times per year and wouldn't watch it on TV.  I watch 100-110 Astros games per season, at a minimum.

I like the mix of haves and have-nots.  If it's just minor leagues, again, that's not going to drive my interest.  I'll watch em when they make the NFL.  Two leagues of haves that'll all be ing playing on Sundays eventually is not necessarily "better" IMHO.

If a FOX conference has 36-40 schools, and a Disney conference has 36-40 schools... then we're still talking about 72-80 universities playing major college football.  I don't think the loss of CUSA, the MAC, etc., will be enough to make the sport feel like NFL Lite.  There are still a lot of haves and have-nots present.  

The people who are making the case that the top tier is too large are right.  Dozens of schools have moved up from FCS in the last few decades.  But the people trying to make a case for a "big brands only" top tier are wrong, too.  That's too small and isn't recognizable as college football.  There is middle ground on all of this, though.   

[Sandbagging Steve 982]

 

[Al_4_ISU 12,473]

I'm all for it. Top 16 programs fuck off and the rest of us can go back to something more interesting. Do it.

Ditto.

Make the main tree house so exclusive 90% of fans don’t give a shit

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Sandbagging Steve said:

 

That's better Joel.

[BurntOrange&White 39,934]

15 hours ago, slorch said:

Once it goes to the Big 2, meh.  Not sure I'll tune in. Who the fuck am I kidding?  I'll watch as I always have. 

 

   Very anxious to see what becomes of the 8 conference games and the November cupcake, as has been the SEC tradition for some time now. As a general fan of the game I want to see that changed.  That's a root cause of scoffing at "increased governance."  They can't even get( or want?) consistent schedule structures across the leagues.

Would also love for the playoff to be expanded and get rid of the shenanigans/ exclusivity/ bullshit of the selection process.  The current set up is bullshit, but they don't care that it is.

Yeah, Joel is spouting the living fuck out of the company line.  He gets paid to do that.  He's better when he speaks Joel Klatt.

Yeah no one tunes into the NFL because it has two conferences.

[Uncle Nate 2,097]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Yeah no one tunes into the NFL because it has two conferences.

Tell me you completely missed the point without telling me you completely missed the point. 
 

We don’t need an NFL 2.0 or NFL lite. CFB has a rabid fan base because it is a unique product. Well, it was a unique product. It’s already gone down this road with the Jumbotrons and commercials and canned music, trying too hard to emulate the “entertainment” of pro stadiums. This will be the last nail in the coffin for its unique brand. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21,205]

I rarely watch the NFL, after all this shit goes down, I'll likely watch Texas games and that's about it.  CFB as I've known it my whole life is fading away fast.  Oh well, will wait and see how it shakes out but when you are making all these moves solely based on money...it won't end well. 

[BurntOrange&White 39,934]

8 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Tell me you completely missed the point without telling me you completely missed the point. 
 

We don’t need an NFL 2.0 or NFL lite. CFB has a rabid fan base because it is a unique product. Well, it was a unique product. It’s already gone down this road with the Jumbotrons and commercials and canned music, trying too hard to emulate the “entertainment” of pro stadiums. This will be the last nail in the coffin for its unique brand. 

The biggest and most rabid fan bases in college football will reside in the BIG and the SEC. It was a unique product, those days are dead. The future is what Klatt and some others around here think it will be. Mini-NFL with it's own rules, no NCAA.

All that needs to happen is ND, Oregon, Washington, Clemson, FSU, Miami, Duke and UNC to be gobbled up. 


Outside of a handful of west coast and northeast fan bases the die hards of college football are midwest and southeast geographically.

Edited July 7, 2022 by BurntOrange&White