Realignment talk not going away

[2300 Nueces 163]

The Big 12 had 21 players total drafted into the NFL.  Texas had 3.  Holy shit something has to change.  This is horrible.  The Big 12 is a shit conference.  Not sure I'm down for any merger whatsoever.  This is like being at a party with a room full of fat chicks.....

Edited April 26, 2020 by 2300 Nueces

[Thiefery 4995]

22 minutes ago, 2300 Nueces said:

The Big 12 had 21 players total drafted into the NFL.  Texas had 3.  Holy shit something has to change.  This is horrible.  The Big 12 is a shit conference.  Not sure I'm down for any merger whatsoever.  This is like being at a party with a room full of fat chicks.....

if Texas had 8 players drafted over the weekend.. would you really care about the big 12 conference total numbers?  Geez homie, grab you a tecate and relax man.

[2300 Nueces 163]

17 minutes ago, Thiefery said:

if Texas had 8 players drafted over the weekend.. would you really care about the big 12 conference total numbers?  Geez homie, grab you a tecate and relax man.

Undrafted means just that, "UNDRAFTED".  The Big 12 is a shit show.  There is no other way to slice it.  Something has to change fast or we go down with the ship.  Not too sure that isn't baked into the cake at this point.  And by the way, "we're baaaack".

[Thiefery 4995]

4 hours ago, 2300 Nueces said:

Undrafted means just that, "UNDRAFTED".  The Big 12 is a shit show.  There is no other way to slice it.  Something has to change fast or we go down with the ship.  Not too sure that isn't baked into the cake at this point.  And by the way, "we're baaaack".

Jesus christ.. i get it with the negative Texas takes..but now you wanna use the conference as an excuse..If we were in the SEC and still only had 3 players drafted, would you would feel better since the SEC got soo many kids drafted?  

[S11 16]

Look at the recruiting ground and historical brand.

Big 12 draft picks really need to be split by  groups:

 

schools youd expect to do really well:

texas & ou

 

schools That should do decently well

BU, TCU, OkSt, WVU, possibly TTU despite Lubbock being far from any recruiting area (although they do a good job overcoming it)

 

everyone else who doesn’t sit in a good recruiting area  (Remember WVU sits close to Pittsburgh, Virginia, and Md.)

 

So you’re mostly relying on 7 schools.   Compared to 14 team SEC, B1G, and ACC it’s going to lead to some disparity.  League needs to do better but the raw number would be better compared with adjusting for those 7.   Other than Hakeem Adeniji did the other three have anyone drafted?

the entire SEC is basically in a recruiting ground, 12/14 in the ACC are, the B1G has most of the east as well as some programs with some linemen developing in pipelines established in the west.

Edited April 27, 2020 by S11

[2300 Nueces 163]

43 minutes ago, Thiefery said:

Jesus christ.. i get it with the negative Texas takes..but now you wanna use the conference as an excuse..If we were in the SEC and still only had 3 players drafted, would you would feel better since the SEC got soo many kids drafted?  

Goodness dude.  The conference is a drag on recruiting.  Can you see that?  It's a negative feedback loop that we are having to fight against in our own state.  Hopefully you are able to understand this.  The Pac sent more players to the NFL than the B12 did..... The Big 12 is a drag on UT Austin.  It just is.  Maybe you would feel better if we were winning the American Conference.  They weren't far behind the Big 12.  We need out now.

Edited April 27, 2020 by 2300 Nueces

[PhillyD 1257]

1 hour ago, 2300 Nueces said:

Goodness dude.  The conference is a drag on recruiting.  Can you see that?  It's a negative feedback loop that we are having to fight against in our own state.  Hopefully you are able to understand this.  The Pac sent more players to the NFL than the B12 did..... The Big 12 is a drag on UT Austin.  It just is.  Maybe you would feel better if we were winning the American Conference.  They weren't far behind the Big 12.  We need out now.

This take is so weak.  If Texas were in the PAC 12, the conference would be a drag on recruiting.  Same is true of the ACC and Big 10.  If we were in the SEC, you'd be complaining that we need to be dirtier.  It's just a totally weak take.  Texas needs to recruit better and develop better end of story.  The Big 12 isn't helping, but it's damn sure not the cause of our suckage.  

[Hurtlocker 2212]

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2020 by Hurtlocker

[hiphopfroggy 121]

 

 

 

Texas HS Football

 

@texashsfootball

·

Apr 26

 

2020 NFL Draft: States with the Most Drafted Players

1: Texas 34

2: California 24

3: Georgia 21

4: Florida 18

 

#2020NFLDraft #NFLDraft

 

#TXHSFB

 

https://twitter.com/CoachGWest/status/1254460208996376578?s=20

 

The conference overall could do better producing NFL talent for sure. But just talking about UT, haven't you guys been recruiting highly? Is it possible there is a developmental issue? I don't know just spitballing, adding some Cali school would probably help. 

[SunUvAbitchMarcos 129]

      Texas HS Football   @texashsfootball · Apr 26  

2020 NFL Draft: States with the Most Drafted Players

1: Texas 34

2: California 24

3: Georgia 21

4: Florida 18

 

#2020NFLDraft #NFLDraft

 

#TXHSFB

 

https://twitter.com/CoachGWest/status/1254460208996376578?s=20

 

The conference overall could do better producing NFL talent for sure. But just talking about UT, haven't you guys been recruiting highly? Is it possible there is a developmental issue? I don't know just spitballing, adding some Cali school would probably help. 

*spiffballing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kopp0e 1135]

A side note, Oklahoma kept Joe Horraz as prez:

On 4/26/2020 at 11:14 PM, PhillyD said:

This take is so weak.  If Texas were in the PAC 12, the conference would be a drag on recruiting.  Same is true of the ACC and Big 10.  If we were in the SEC, you'd be complaining that we need to be dirtier.  It's just a totally weak take.  Texas needs to recruit better and develop better end of story.  The Big 12 isn't helping, but it's damn sure not the cause of our suckage.  

The top 2 states, where players originated from:

In both cases, powers Texas & USC are going through rebuilding cycles, from (previous) coaches who cratered the respective programs...
A way to retain players in both states, (getting better recruiting in the other state, would be the top 8 brands from both XII & PAC merge:

PXC:

West division:

Washington
Oregon
California
UCLA
USC
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado

(8 of the current 12 schools [75%] are secured of a future together, in a model)...

East division:

Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
TCU
Texas
Texas Tech

(8 of the current 10 schools [80%] are secured of a future together, in a model)...

3rd tier network(s):

Either as 16 team conference network with all rights pooled in, placed on PXCN...

Or with UT/ OU/ USC/ UCLA with individual Disney 3rd tier/ 12 others on ESPN+...

Bowl alignment:

• #1-a The PXC champion goes to Sugar Bowl if not selected for playoffs...
• #1-b The PXC runner-up goes to Rose Bowl unless selected for playoffs...
• #2 Las Vegas Bowl - PXC vs MWC
• #3 Holiday Bowl - PXC vs ACC
• #4 Alamo Bowl - PXC vs B1G
• #5 Sun Bowl - PXC vs ACC
• #6 Cheeze_It Bowl - PXC vs SEC
• #7 Liberty Bowl - PXC vs SEC
• #8 Camping World Bowl - PXC vs AAC
• #9 Redbox Bowl - PXC vs B1G
• #10 First Responder Bowl - PXC vs AAC
• #11 Texas Bowl - PXC vs SEC
  
  11 bowl slots in total, for 16 conference members -
  Thus allowing 68% of PXC to compete, if bowl eligible (amount needed wins/ no ban)...

(Not discounting a possibility of switching out rights for 2 higher prestige bowls) -
PXC gains rights to Cotton Bowl & Fiesta Bowl, giving the conference "home field advantage"...

Possible "lawsuits"..?
GoR's for PAC, end in 2024/ GoR's for XII, end in 2025 -
And thus a new media conglomerate can oversee implementation of a new 3rd teir net...

West Virginia would have solid chance for being placed in a ESPN-backed ACC, to propel value of ACCN...
Likewise, (in this scenario) Stanford/ Utah/ Baylor, all move to MWC with BYU as 16 team member league...
MWC could be known as the 5th (quasi) power conference, & AAC looks to add 5 members to get 16 total...

Having old rival as Colorado, along with ever-growing population (think recruiting) in Arizona/ California helps both Texas & Oklahoma...

[Thiefery 4995]

Then play the opposite division schools, once every 4 years?

[kopp0e 1135]

On 5/10/2020 at 6:37 AM, Thiefery said:

Then play the opposite division schools, once every 4 years?

The alternative (for less than 1 game vs opposite division) every 4 years:

Washington - Texas Tech
Oregon - Oklahoma
California - Texas
UCLA - Kansas 
USC - TCU
Arizona - Kansas State
Arizona State - Oklahoma State
Colorado - Iowa State

All teams have 1 cross-divisional rival (like SEC), with 9 conference tilts...
7 games vs east division/ 2 games vs west division & 1 cross-divisional...
Thus, all 6 teams in a opposite division are played once every 3 seasons...

Ohh, I almost forgot, "actual news" Connecticut signs deal with CBSSN...

Edited May 11, 2020 by kopp0e

[Hurtlocker 2212]

31 minutes ago, kopp0e said:

 

Ohh, I almost forgot, "actual news" Connecticut signs deal with CBSSN...

Considering the MWC gets $20m a year for all their games on CBSSN, I'm guessing UConn nutted themselves a mill or two.

[Thiefery 4995]

If that Big Cigar take was serious on that IT update.. I don't think this Pac expansion is gonna happen.  Feels like CDC is going to grab the next round of realignment by the balls.  I have a feeling we will be in the SEC or Big..WITH LHN in tow

[Hurtlocker 2212]

1 hour ago, Thiefery said:

If that Big Cigar take was serious on that IT update.. I don't think this Pac expansion is gonna happen.  Feels like CDC is going to grab the next round of realignment by the balls.  I have a feeling we will be in the SEC or Big..WITH LHN in tow

Admittedly I'm just peaking in from time to time, so what IT update did I miss?

[Thiefery 4995]

11 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Admittedly I'm just peaking in from time to time, so what IT update did I miss?

think it was nahlin.. but along the lines of the Big Cigar saying the Big 12 isn't in this all together like it seems regarding the Pandemic and football being played this fall.  Texas will be playing this fall, with or without some schools in the Big 12. Nahlin (or whatever writer) then put this can't be good for conference realignment down the rd.

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

1 hour ago, Thiefery said:

think it was nahlin.. but along the lines of the Big Cigar saying the Big 12 isn't in this all together like it seems regarding the Pandemic and football being played this fall.  Texas will be playing this fall, with or without some schools in the Big 12. Nahlin (or whatever writer) then put this can't be good for conference realignment down the rd.

I have a hard time believing this, mostly because I can't see a single current Big 12 school passing on football this fall.

[Thiefery 4995]

9 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I have a hard time believing this, mostly because I can't see a single current Big 12 school passing on football this fall.

It's "Big Cigar Talk" so you are most likely right.  I'm thinking it's more to do with Bowlsby who, still has that California mindset (right or wrong), came out first with the no Zoom meetings, then if no students are on campus this fall, no football.  He has now changed stances on both of those statements, Zoom meetings are allowed and if there is online classes going on, football can still be played.

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

10 minutes ago, Thiefery said:

It's "Big Cigar Talk" so you are most likely right.  I'm thinking it's more to do with Bowlsby who, still has that California mindset (right or wrong), came out first with the no Zoom meetings, then if no students are on campus this fall, no football.  He has now changed stances on both of those statements, Zoom meetings are allowed and if there is online classes going on, football can still be played.

Having said that, I do think if you find a situation where some schools in a league don't agree to play while others do, it could definitely be a catalyst to further realignment.  I just don't see a single Big 12 school that's going to sit this fall out if they aren't being forced by some higher power to do so.  There won't be a single SEC school that does it either.

The other conferences will deal with this to varying degrees.

Frankly, I think the COVID thing strengthens the Big 12's position.  This will divide the college football world into the schools that truly care about CFB, and those that don't.  Schools that make this a priority and want to be in the highest echelons of the game will be there.  Those private schools that struggle to fill small stadiums will be the next cull.

Edited May 12, 2020 by Al_4_ISU

[Thiefery 4995]

Just now, Al_4_ISU said:

Having said that, I do think if you find a situation where some schools in a league don't agree to play while others do, it could definitely be a catalyst to further realignment.  I just don't see a single Big 12 school that's going to sit this fall out if they aren't being forced by some higher power to do so.  There won't be a single SEC school that does it either.

The other conferences will deal with this to varying degrees.

Yep be interested in seeing how the PAC deals with this. Oregon gov seems set that there will be no football season this fall.  Seems like Washington and California tend to trend that way as well.. however, AZ seems like a state which wants football back ASAP.  I also wonder if schools where I live (VA and VA Tech) decide not to play either.. but FSU, MIA and CLemson do.  Could get ugly.. I mean that type of disagreements could dissolve GORs correct?

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

18 minutes ago, Thiefery said:

Yep be interested in seeing how the PAC deals with this. Oregon gov seems set that there will be no football season this fall.  Seems like Washington and California tend to trend that way as well.. however, AZ seems like a state which wants football back ASAP.  I also wonder if schools where I live (VA and VA Tech) decide not to play either.. but FSU, MIA and CLemson do.  Could get ugly.. I mean that type of disagreements could dissolve GORs correct?

I don't know enough to be authoritative here (I doubt anyone posting here does), but I would think those kind of seismic differences could make something like that happen.

I think you'll see this kind of breakdown in conferences about schools wanting to play and not playing:

SEC:  everyone will play

Big 12:  everyone will play

Pac 12:  everyone but AZ will NOT play

Big 10:  Rutgers, Maryland, Northwestern will NOT play.  The others will.  

ACC:  Clemson, VA Tech, FSU, Miami will want to play.  The others will NOT.

[Thiefery 4995]

Wonder if Michigan and Michigan state will be playing.. isn't Ann Arbour being hit pretty bad right now?

[Hurtlocker 2212]

34 minutes ago, Thiefery said:

Yep be interested in seeing how the PAC deals with this. Oregon gov seems set that there will be no football season this fall.  Seems like Washington and California tend to trend that way as well.. however, AZ seems like a state which wants football back ASAP.  I also wonder if schools where I live (VA and VA Tech) decide not to play either.. but FSU, MIA and CLemson do.  Could get ugly.. I mean that type of disagreements could dissolve GORs correct?

Ha, we're in the same part of the world and I've been wondering that myself.  

[Big Frog II 511]

If football does not get played, there are going to be a lot of athletic departments in a world of hurt.

[Jabberwocky 1666]

Some discussion about Pac 12 decision making regarding playing football in 2020, and how it might affect USC here:

https://247sports.com/college/usc/Article/USC-football-Pac-12-Notre-Dame-return-to-football-146865293/

I was reading this article the other day, and remembered it after catching up with this thread today.

[kopp0e 1135]

As far as I can tell, the "back-up plan" for B1G is that teams might be quarantined all year...

That's still better than no football, as mentioned Utah/ Arizona/ Arizona State/ Colorado are prepping for fall...

If XII adding Colorado/ Utah/ Arizona/ Arizona State, to reach 14 (maybe N'western/ Stanford ect.,  don't play in 2020.?!

Edited May 12, 2020 by kopp0e

[2300 Nueces 163]

22 minutes ago, Big Frog II said:

If football does not get played, there are going to be a lot of athletic departments in a world of hurt.

We could see an all out "free for all"  if some schools decide not to play.  There will be a lot of athletic departments taking bailouts but not playing could get them locked out permanently.

[notre dame joe 187]

5 hours ago, Thiefery said:

It's "Big Cigar Talk" so you are most likely right.  I'm thinking it's more to do with Bowlsby who, still has that California mindset (right or wrong), came out first with the no Zoom meetings, then if no students are on campus this fall, no football.  He has now changed stances on both of those statements, Zoom meetings are allowed and if there is online classes going on, football can still be played.

Yeah you wonder if he realized no play = no pay.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

20 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

Some discussion about Pac 12 decision making regarding playing football in 2020, and how it might affect USC here:

https://247sports.com/college/usc/Article/USC-football-Pac-12-Notre-Dame-return-to-football-146865293/

I was reading this article the other day, and remembered it after catching up with this thread today.

They seem a little surly.  

[camel at sea 589]

I'd guess that Utah, the Arizona schools, and probably SC will want to play football.  Stanford might want to play, too.  But I bet the local alumni politics of playing football are worse in Palo Alto than in Los Angeles.

 

If refusal to play somehow triggers a contract/GOR breach within the PAC,then maybe those four (SC, UA, ASU, UU) get the Big 12 to 14 by 2021.  I assume all four would be operating as quasi-independents for 2020 at this relatively late stage.  

[2300 Nueces 163]

42 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

I'd guess that Utah, the Arizona schools, and probably SC will want to play football.  Stanford might want to play, too.  But I bet the local alumni politics of playing football are worse in Palo Alto than in Los Angeles.

 

If refusal to play somehow triggers a contract/GOR breach within the PAC,then maybe those four (SC, UA, ASU, UU) get the Big 12 to 14 by 2021.  I assume all four would be operating as quasi-independents for 2020 at this relatively late stage.  

This would be awesome.  You could prolly break off CU as well which would take us to 15.  Not a great deal for WVU but well, too bad.

Edited May 14, 2020 by 2300 Nueces

[bullet 1596]

Cal St. will have only online classes although SDSU says they will still play football.  UC schools haven't announced.

I find it hard to believe they would do football with no on campus classes.

[2300 Nueces 163]

C-USA and Sun Belt may be joining forces soon.  Likely to commence with pods to save money on travel.  Could this be the recipe for the B12 and Pac12? 

 

There will be a total of 24 teams in the new C-USA/Sunbelt.....  The main difference being the geographic pods will greatly help the travel costs of USA/SB.  B12 and P12 are already geographically split and pods wouldn't help that much.  Anyway.....  something is happening.

 

https://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/conference-usa/article242750786.html

Edited May 18, 2020 by 2300 Nueces

[LTbear 4168]

17 minutes ago, 2300 Nueces said:

C-USA and Sun Belt may be joining forces soon.  Likely to commence with pods to save money on travel.  Could this be the recipe for the B12 and Pac12? 

 

There will be a total of 24 teams in the new C-USA/Sunbelt.....  The main difference being the geographic pods will greatly help the travel costs of USA/SB.  B12 and P12 are already geographically split and pods wouldn't help that much.  Anyway.....  something is happening.

 

https://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/conference-usa/article242750786.html

That's just some dude speculating. 

[TrashMaster G 17554]

 

On 5/12/2020 at 9:21 AM, Al_4_ISU said:

I don't know enough to be authoritative here (I doubt anyone posting here does), but I would think those kind of seismic differences could make something like that happen.

I think you'll see this kind of breakdown in conferences about schools wanting to play and not playing:

SEC:  everyone will play

Big 12:  everyone will play

Pac 12:  everyone but AZ will NOT play

Big 10:  Rutgers, Maryland, Northwestern will NOT play.  The others will.  

ACC:  Clemson, VA Tech, FSU, Miami will want to play.  The others will NOT.

In the PAC - Count on Utah and Colorado wanting to play as well

ACC - I think the North Carolina schools will also play.  Probably UVa too.

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

46 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

 

In the PAC - Count on Utah and Colorado wanting to play as well

ACC - I think the North Carolina schools will also play.  Probably UVa too.

I don't see CU and UVA playing, but would agree on Utah and the NC schools.  At least the NC public schools.

Edited May 18, 2020 by Al_4_ISU

[Hurtlocker 2212]

Not sure where to put this, but impactful:

Why we may be reaching a tipping point for the Power Five to break away from the FBS

Quote

University of Utah economist Ted Tatos was asked to consider whether the coronavirus could impact a second consecutive NCAA Tournament. While schools are eagerly anticipating a return of college football, let's not forget how this historic moment in time began in the college sports world.

Despite the pandemic, the NCAA's foundation has already been in question. But during these uncertain times, the association may be one more calamitous event away from slipping off a cliff of relevancy.

"If there's no NCAA Tournament next year," Tatos said. "… I think then there has to be a breakaway from this model."

To put it more plainly, a separation of the Power Five conferences from the NCAA has long been possible. Those 65 schools, including independent Notre Dame, already exist as separate entities -- financially, competitively and even corporately. But with the coronavirus ratcheting up the stakes, a tipping point may be at hand. 

"I'm telling you, if you or I were going to place a bet on a stock … you could double down on the Power Five being a separate entity now within two years," said Vince Thompson, founder and CEO of MELT, an Atlanta-based sports and entertainment marketing firm.

Basketball would be the tipping point here because it is the financial backbone of the NCAA. College athletics is experiencing what it's like to be without March Madness for one year.

For now, Thompson -- an Auburn graduate who has been a part of 16 Final Fours -- is already forecasting an accelerated timeline for massive changes in college athletics due to the coronavirus.

"With or without a cure, you're looking at forced modernization of the NCAA. It is going to be an accelerated seismic shift in college athletics," he said. "The good Lord has a wicked sense of humor. It is forcing a lot of hands that even three months ago, [if] you and I would have had this conversation, we'd be laughing about it."

The economy has opened the door

No one is laughing these days. The economy is tanking, dragging college athletics down with it.  The NCAA's relevancy and might have never been more in question. It is losing in court. It is losing its mission. It long ago lost in the court public opinion. There are few brands with a lower Q rating.

These last months have laid bare how even large athletic departments live paycheck to paycheck. Until two months ago, we would have never considered March Madness being canceled.

The economic impact has caused such upheaval in college sports that schools began trimming budgets, personnel and sports. Some coaches took temporary pay cuts.

A fissure in the college athletic power structure has widened. The NCAA is the middle juggling a pandemic, its finances and an increasingly skeptical membership.

Iowa State athletic director Jamie Pollard warned of an "ice age" if the 2020 college football season isn't played. As bad as March Madness' cancellation was for schools, the shortfall was only a fraction of what football delivers: typically 80% of athletic budgets in a $6.5 billion industry.

A Washington University study commissioned by ESPN stated, if the football season were canceled, the Power Five could lose $4 billion.

"The next year will be a critical year for the NCAA," Tatos said. "It will be a critical year for college athletics as a whole. But I think we are starting to see how professional this enterprise is, how divorced it is from any type of education. Schools are starting to make decisions on financial points, [saying], 'This is amateur sports? This whole charade is coming to an end.'"

If the financial reckoning becomes severe enough, entire athletic departments could go away. Already, the Mid-American Conference is slashing budgets and sports. Never mind athletics, Akron cut six of its 11 departments within the university.

"We're going to lose institutions," Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick predicted. "We're going to have a number of member institutions who won't be involved in college education in 3-4 years."

The dividing line between the haves and have nots is simple sports Darwinism. Large public state universities with massive followings can be athletically self-sufficient. Below that line, the more state subsidies schools use in the form of student fees, the more vulnerable they are.

That's why the likes of the MAC have shuddered financially. More schools will follow if for no other reason than this: If sports aren't being played and enrollment doesn't go up, those fees will dry up.

The NCAA's relevancy is fading

If the underpinnings of the current structure are further weakened, the Power Five would be able to survive athletically, competitively and corporately. Their brand, influence and economics are better than that of their membership organization.

In other words, they -- not the NCAA -- are the game.

"The NCAA is becoming less and less relevant," said one Power Five president who did not wish to be identified. "I could see the Power Five conferences creating their own version of the NCAA."

Thompson calls it a "grand reckoning" between the NCAA's amateur ideal (the so-called "collegiate model") and athletic departments' for-profit business model.

"That is the greatest inherent friction of all time," Thompson said. "Those two [things] can't serve the same master mutually."

That forced modernization of college athletics may force the NCAA to either remake itself or be left behind.

It already seems to be ceding it power asking for help from Congress to fully implement name, image and likeness legislation.

Even a year ago, the NCAA was loathe to allow the federal government into its affairs. Now, the association and Power Five are spending hundreds of thousands on Washington, D.C. lobbyists to make it gets an antitrust exemption from Congress. That after moving the amateur goalposts once again. For decades, the NCAA was willing to die on a hill screaming "not a penny more" for athletes beyond room, board, books, tuition and fees.

If the NCAA gets its wish for an antitrust exemption from Congress, it will not only lose a large part of that argument, it will lose part of its identity and power. In some way, the feds will be calling the shots with that much invested in the system.

The setting will not be unlike a pitch on "Shark Tank" where budding companies sell part of their equity to the highest bidder.

Think about it: The same association that defines itself as the benevolent overseer of athletics as a recreational complement to education will soon, grudgingly, watch athletes earn six figures based on their athletic fame. Those players would be "professionalized," which is essentially everything the NCAA is against.

"How they can maintain a position that is simply not justifiable?" said Ellen Staurowsky, professor of Sport Management at Drexel University. "If you look at the roots of amateurism, which has now been incorporated into court rulings, this whole idea of the revered tradition of amateurism [is false]."

More friction: The NCAA has done itself no favors with recent enforcement dealings.

Criticism continues to roil throughout college athletics over the North Carolina case that concluded 2 ½ years ago. The school avoided any major penalties despite what some saw as an 18-year pattern of continued academic fraud.

The NCAA also took no action after the Rice Commission -- assembled to clean up college basketball -- specifically asked for a clearer definition of academic conduct.

Further consternation was caused by the NCAA Board of Directors. It deemed there would be no appeal to rulings made in the new Independent Accountability Resolution Process. Memphis, NC State and Kansas basketball all recently entered that process. The NCAA has drawn strong criticism from NC State and Kansas as their cases continue.

The Washington Post recently called NCAA credibility into question again: Why wasn't it better prepared for the cancellation of the basketball tournament? The NCAA on Tuesday released a detailed accounting of their insurance coverage and how they arrived at the payout post-tournament cancellation. The NCAA Tournament is covered for 2021.

"You saw a dilution or dismantling of the NCAA prior to that," Thompson said. "But they don't have anybody to blame but themselves. The ultimate institutional arrogance lies in Indianapolis."

As a membership organization in charge of the safety and welfare of athletes returning amid a pandemic, the NCAA simply cannot allow anything to go wrong. Unlike professionals, college athletes can't dictate working conditions. They don't have a union. They are at the mercy of adults who can't screw it up.

Former NCAA executive director Walter Byers railed against the organization he used to run with an iron fist in his 1995 book, "Unsportsmanlike Conduct, Exploiting College Athletes." Byers said: "Collegiate amateurism is not a moral issue. It is economic camouflage for monopoly practice."

Fast forward to 2014. In defending accusations of monopolistic practices, an NCAA lawyer said: "It is a cartel that does good things, as opposed to a cartel that goes bad things."

Huh?

"The NCAA, the model of 'amateurism' is evolving," Penn State coach James Franklin said. "It's going to be a transition. It's going to be tricky."

What would a Power Five breakaway look like?

It is becoming clear it will be the Power Five that will lead college athletics out of the pandemic. For better or worse, the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC control the money, the sponsors and the games themselves -- because they control football. Like everyone else, they're learning how to control the medical aspects of a safe return to play.

While the NCAA puts on a heck of a basketball tournament, it does not sponsor a championship at the highest level of football (Football Bowl Subdivision).

That was reinforced in 1984 when the NCAA lost a landmark Supreme Court case for the control football television rights.

The Supreme Court basically said it out loud for the first time back then: In that space, the NCAA was a monopoly.

Four-and-a-half decades later, the term has been worn out by critics, lawyers and judges. More and more, the question has emerged: How long can a modern monopoly last? 

That has landed us at this point where the game's postseason is made up of an LLC named the College Football Playoff, of which 130 FBS schools and ESPN all have a stake in its success.

NCAA sets play and practice rules and handles enforcement, but it has to tread lightly. The NCAA is nothing without that highest level of football, particularly the Power Five, which makes up half of the FBS (65 of 130, including Notre Dame).

The "Power Five" nickname itself sprang organically out of the 2015 NCAA Convention that granted those conferences more autonomy in NCAA matters. That has essentially led us to this point where the Power Five administrators could take their ball, go home and create a separate, more sensible, more profitable equivalent to a Fortune 500 company.

Don't necessarily think of those 65 schools would be completely alone. They'd most likely have to play somebody. Think about a group of, say, the top 90 or 100 schools to enhance scheduling and a television contract.

The American Athletic Conference has long considered itself among the power conferences despite being part of the Group of Five. It even built a marketing plan around the term "Power Six" to indicate as much.

"If you talk about the Power Five breaking away … the American has been adamant that they would have to go with them," a source close to the conference said.

Would the Power Five negotiate with a players union? Sure. That's kind of the point of breaking away from the NCAA. Stage their own basketball tournament? Absolutely.

Because the Power Five don't "own" hoops' postseason, schools play for NCAA-mandated equitable "units" awarded after each win. That number would have been $282,000 in 2020. Each of the Power Five earned $66 million just for being in the CFP.

Eyebrows were raised earlier this month when Emmert said the NCAA wouldn't mandate a return to play from the pandemic. How could it? The NCAA can issue all the medical guidelines it wants, but that's still all they are -- guidelines. Not bylaws that can be enforced by actual penalties. The membership would never allow it. The 452-page NCAA Manual is already too big and too confusing.

As an entity, the NCAA seems to exist these days to avoid lawsuit. Every major decision is rooted in that consideration.

Its COO, Donald Remy, is also its chief legal officer, No. 2 in command behind Emmert. Remy graduated from LSU with honors, reaching second lieutenant in the Army. He is smooth, dogged and erudite as a leader and litigator.

The NCAA cost of attendance stipend evolved out of the 2014 O'Bannon anti-trust decision. In 2018, the NCAA lost a Supreme Court challenge (joining with major professional sports leagues) that led to single-game state sports betting.

Name, image and likeness is basically the result of the NCAA being backed into a legal corner. When the NCAA finally relented on NIL, it called the process "modernizing" its rules. But the association didn't react meaningfully until multiple states developed their own NIL legislation.

Will it be enough?

"This framework still does not come close to providing college athletes with the rights and opportunities [athletes] deserve," two senators wrote Emmert.

The ultimate question

Perhaps it's time to ask, simply: What exactly is the long-term future of the NCAA? Sure, it provides branding and structure and returns a large part of that tournament revenue to the membership, but it also props up an antiquated amateur model, the only one like it in the world.

All while the highest, most powerful level of college sports continues to prove it can run itself.

 "It would be healthy for the football powers to separate," Staurowsky said. "It's obvious why they've maintained their interlocking relationship with the NCAA. It's to receive the tax benefit of being with an educational entity.

"Given the financial stakes involved, it would be a healthy thing for the football powers to spin off and become an identifiable college football league. Have a players association on the other side of that. There are some people who are talking about moving in that direction. The time has come to really think about that."

To defend its not-a-penny-more philosophy in court, the NCAA has continually maintained further player compensation would turn off the average fan. The paying customers would stop coming.

That's been proven false. Former LSU long snapper Blake Ferguson "made" $12,000 a year while in school in allowable grants, cost of attendance and scholarship checks. Last year, Ninth Circuit judge Claudia Wilken told the NCAA its current athlete benefits add up to "pay for play."

Despite all those benefits, LSU somehow had no problem selling out against Alabama -- and everywhere it played. If Clemson quarterback Trevor Lawrence were allowed his NIL rights at the moment, he'd be worth $400,000 in endorsements.

Zion Williamson would have been worth $4 million.

Anyone turned off yet?

University of Minnesota trustee Michael Hsu recently introduced a resolution that would prohibit the NCAA from interfering with athletes getting "financial support from any source to cover food, shelter, medical" and insurance costs "until the COVID-19 crisis ends."

The National College Players Association -- an athletes' advocacy group -- called on the NCAA last month for emergency legislation to provide the same benefits.

Maybe that's the latest example. In face of withering criticism, in the face of a pandemic, in the face of changing social mores, speed is of the essence.

Maybe the NCAA just can't move fast enough.

"There is no reason why the University of Minnesota or any university in the Power Five can't have another membership in a new organization created by the other schools," said that Minnesota trustee.

"I see it happening. And if there is more money involved in that, I can't see why we wouldn't do it."

 

[Iceman 2701]

On 5/11/2020 at 4:42 PM, kopp0e said:

The alternative (for less than 1 game vs opposite division) every 4 years:

Washington - Texas Tech
Oregon - Oklahoma
California - Texas
UCLA - Kansas 
USC - TCU
Arizona - Kansas State
Arizona State - Oklahoma State
Colorado - Iowa State

All teams have 1 cross-divisional rival (like SEC), with 9 conference tilts...
7 games vs east division/ 2 games vs west division & 1 cross-divisional...
Thus, all 6 teams in a opposite division are played once every 3 seasons...

Ohh, I almost forgot, "actual news" Connecticut signs deal with CBSSN...

There is ZERO connection between Tech and Washington.

 

Y'all just drawing teams out of a hat? It could be CU or one of the AZ schools, formerly Border Conference mates with Tech.

[closetohumping 17440]

The only realignment that’s gonna happen this year is me realigning my junk in south Austin’s moms mouth

[bullet 1596]

This data was posted by JRSEC who found it posted by TexasJeremy on a WVU board (eer247).  JRSEC said there was a lot of additional data.  I read a number of good posts by TexasJeremy some years ago (probably on one of the WVU boards).  Its TV viewership for last year by conference and school for national games.

2018-19 College Football Season's Nationally Ranked Games' Viewership Information:

1. SEC Total Viewers in Millions: 428.276
2. Big 10 Total Viewers in Millions: 348.378
3. Big 12 Total Viewers in Millions: 239.762
4. ACC Total Viewers in Millions: 233.157
5. PAC12 Total Viewers in Millions: 181.811



Average Viewers Per Member for the Conferences

1. SEC Average Viewers per School: 30.591M
2. Big 10 Average Viewers per School: 24.884M
3. Big 12 Average Viewers per School: 23.976M
4. ACC Average Viewers per School: 16.654M
5. PAC 12 Average Viewers per School: 15,151M


The Following Will Give by Conference the National Ranking of the School and It's Total Viewership in Millions for All Ranked Games:

SEC

1. Alabama 114.364
5. Georgia 63.410
9. Louisiana State 49.793
12. Auburn 34.278
13. Florida 30.654
16. Texas A&M 27.081
20. Mississippi State 22.718
29. Kentucky 17.038
35. Missouri 15.103
37. Tennessee 14.725
39. Mississippi 13.518
42. South Carolina 11.626
57. Vanderbilt 7.948
60. Arkansas 6.010


Big 10

2. Ohio State 86.97
7. Michigan 54.946
11. Penn State 37.297
14. Northwestern 27.360
17. Michigan State 26.427
18. Wisconsin 23.788
24. Iowa 20.686
27. Nebraska 18.456
32. Purdue 15.903
40. Maryland 12.830
45. Indiana 10.837
58. Minnesota 7.386
63. Rutgers 3.038
65. Illinois 2.454



Big 12

4. Oklahoma 65.147
8. Texas 50,710
15. West Virginia 27.186
22. Texas Christian 21.532
23. Oklahoma State 21.026
34. Iowa State 15.394
38. Texas Tech 13.760
44. Baylor 11.080
56. Kansas State 8.041
61. Kansas 5.889


ACC

3. Clemson 74.633
19. Florida State 22.979
25. Miami 20.019
26. Virginia Tech 19.422
31. Syracuse 16.552
33. Pittsburgh 15.928
48. Louisville 10.049
49. N.C. State 9.959
51. Boston College 9.458
53. Georgia Tech 8.468
54. Virginia 8.332
55. Wake Forest 8.121
59. Duke 6.727
64. North Carolina 2.610

6. Notre Dame* 61.159



PAC12


10. Washington 42.313
21. Southern Cal 21.723
28. Washington State 18.226
30. Oregon 17.035
36. Stanford 14.738
41. U.C.L.A. 12.317
42. Utah 11.188
46. Arizona State 10.480
47. Colorado 10.364
50. Arizona 9.56
52. California 9.017
62. Oregon State 4.850

 

 

 

[gmr548 16576]

On 4/26/2020 at 10:04 PM, 2300 Nueces said:

Goodness dude.  The conference is a drag on recruiting.  Can you see that?  It's a negative feedback loop that we are having to fight against in our own state.  Hopefully you are able to understand this.  The Pac sent more players to the NFL than the B12 did..... The Big 12 is a drag on UT Austin.  It just is.  Maybe you would feel better if we were winning the American Conference.  They weren't far behind the Big 12.  We need out now.

Man, I just saw this gem. This is such a dumb post. The last time Texas had a recruiting class outside the top 10 in a non-transition year was 2013 (a class of 15). Before that, 2005 (a class of 14). Your statement is factually incorrect when it comes to recruiting. The high level prospects that choose to leave the state for Bama or Ohio State or whoever aren't doing so to play in those conferences. They're doing to because Bama and Ohio State are way fucking better programs than Texas. You don't see Nebraska or Ole Miss poaching Texas kids. It's about the programs. The best example of this is of course aggy - they still consistently finish below Texas in recruiting despite the Big 12 supposedly being such a drag and having an equal home field advantage. They too lose kids to Bama and LSU. When they do finish above, it's because they took a half dozen additional players, with a lower average rating.

The PAC sent more players to the NFL than the B12 did. Do you think having four additional teams might have something to do with that? The two leagues were essentially the same on a per-team level, 2.2 for the PAC and 2.1 for the B12. Both were superior to the ACC. In 2019, the B12 was a solid third at 2.6 per team, above the PAC and ACC.  I'm not going back further than that but you get the point (or maybe not because you don't seem to understand the issue with comparing gross draft picks in the first place).

The Big 12 has consistently been a top three football conference over the past 20 years. There have been years where it has a strong case as #1. Analytics consistently reflect this as well. It is now where the NFL goes QB shopping. It is not dragging on recruiting. It's fine if you want to be somewhere else as a fan but spouting nonsense like this is silly. The B12 is absolutely a football power conference. It's laughable that you'd even try to argue otherwise.

Edited June 29, 2020 by gmr548

[Valmy77 13226]

The Big 12 is a power conference, one of the top 3 in the country and Texas is one of the big dogs in that conference.

Seeing people wanting us to move laterally and become some outsider on Ohio States or Alabama's turf are crazy IMO. We are right where we need to be.

 

[gmr548 16576]

2 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

The Big 12 is a power conference, one of the top 3 in the country and Texas is one of the big dogs in that conference.

Seeing people wanting us to move laterally and become some outsider on Ohio States or Alabama's turf are crazy IMO. We are right where we need to be.

 

This. Texas needs to be less shitty. That's all.

[DFW Horn 6123]

Look at this shit...💩

 

[LTbear 4168]

Part of me loves it, part of me hates it, but it's so incredibly ridiculous to think it would ever happen that neither matters. 

[Extra Anejo 99]

1 hour ago, LTbear said:

Part of me loves it, part of me hates it, but it's so incredibly ridiculous to think it would ever happen that neither matters. 

Yup, but it does solve lots of issues. 

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

8 minutes ago, Extra Anejo said:

Yup, but it does solve lots of issues. 

It creates at least as many as it solves by forcing the G5 and P5 together. It's horrible.

8x8 to get to 64 can work, even though it will have some weirdness around the edges, but there aren't 120 programs that need to be included in this exercise. 

[TrashMaster G 17554]

6 hours ago, Extra Anejo said:

Yup, but it does solve lots of issues. 

Like what?

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

17 hours ago, SwanderedTalent said:

It creates at least as many as it solves by forcing the G5 and P5 together. It's horrible.

8x8 to get to 64 can work, even though it will have some weirdness around the edges, but there aren't 120 programs that need to be included in this exercise. 

Exactly.  I would go 8x9 for 72, personally, but 120 is way too much.  8x9 sucks in those last few quasi worthy G5s (BYU, Cincy, Memphis).