Realignment talk not going away

[USC Traveler 488]

1 hour ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

And here we thought the Big 10 tv deal was signed and sealed when Warren left the conference.  Turns out, the conference still has no final TV deal:

 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/37693310/big-ten-new-commissioner-television-deal-coaches-uncertainty

 

 

 

 

 

  Hide contents

Kevin Warren took over as Big Ten commissioner in January 2020, and in just three years at the helm, he dealt with the COVID-19 pandemic, helped bring USC and UCLA into the conference in a landscape-altering deal, and secured the massive TV payday before heading back to the NFL as team president and CEO of the Chicago Bears.

When he accepted that job, he said he was leaving the Big Ten in a "demonstratively better position," which was true financially as its schools project more revenue than any league over the course of the deal. His work adding USC and UCLA, who join the conference after the 2023-24 season, was widely praised by members and provided a financial jolt to the television deal.

On campus, it's a bit more muddled. Big Ten schools have seen potential revenue disappear the past few months from a contract that was announced back in August as being worth an average of nearly $1 billion per year through the 2029 football season. More than $70 million in total is suddenly in flux -- nearly $5 million per school -- and it has left administrators around the league seeking answers and calling for financial accountability.

Recently, schools have found out:

They are going to have to pay back nearly $40 million to Fox because, according to sources, Warren delivered NBC the Big Ten football title game in 2026 without the full authority to do so. This all has unfolded under the complicated backdrop of the Big Ten conference not actually controlling the rights to the inventory of this latest deal -- the Big Ten Network does, which is majority owned by Fox. (More on that below.)

They are going to have to pay $25 million total for a deal to pay Fox back for lost 2020 football game inventory. This came after an arrangement between Fox and the conference that was unable to muster the lost revenue from the COVID-19 season.

There's tens of millions of dollars of value of the NBC primetime deal in flux, as Petitti has been racing to ensure it keeps as much of its original value as possible. Historically in the Big Ten, after the first weekend in November, schools were not required to play night games for myriad reasons -- health, recovery and campus logistics among them. These were known in league circles as "tolerances," and prior television contracts accounted for them.

Multiple sources told ESPN there's been pushback from a number of schools, including Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State, to play those late-November night games under the new contract. That leaves Petitti to figure out how to uphold a deal for hundreds of millions of dollars for primetime games without cooperation from some of the league's marquee teams for part of the regular season's most important month.

Athletic departments and coaches around the Big Ten say they were surprised November night games would be part of the deal. They weren't asked for permission to play them prior to the deal or informed of the change ahead of the deal, according to sources. At the same time, NBC wasn't aware until well after the initial contract was signed this summer that these big-brand schools had historic tolerances that were part of the prior television arrangements and would resist being available.

"NBC was surprised, and I was surprised," said Michigan athletic director Warde Manuel. "We had not discussed, and I had not discussed with anyone in the league to change the tolerances we had agreed upon years ago."

Within the industry, though, there was an expectation that, considering the scope of the deal, all schools would play in prime time.

"The fault here is with the administrators on campus," said another industry source. "How did the presidents, chancellors and athletic directors not know this? The universities all signed off on the deal."

While this is being worked through, Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan State recently agreed to concessions to make short-term sacrifices to help the league make up for some lost revenue from the NBC deal.

Penn State will play on the road in a short week on Black Friday against Michigan State, a game that was scheduled before Penn State agreed to it. Ohio State will host Michigan State on Nov. 11, the latest-ever home night game in Ohio State history, which is viewed as another concession to help the league through this moment.

"This is what he's walking into right now," another industry source said of Petitti. "Tony is trying to save it, and what Penn State and Ohio State are doing is actually trying to minimize the losses."

Warren did not return requests for comment.

"We're excited to start our Big Ten deal this fall," an NBC Sports spokesman told ESPN. "We had a great relationship with Kevin Warren, and same with Tony Petitti. We're confident that any and all outstanding issues are well on their way to being resolved."

A full understanding of the deal Warren helped negotiate with NBC, CBS and Fox begins with a bizarre twist -- the Big Ten didn't technically own the rights. (Hence the tension over Warren using the Big Ten title game without Fox's permission.)

In 2016, when the Big Ten announced its long-term television deal with Fox and ESPN, the announcement didn't include all the details. One of the things that didn't get disclosed at the time, nor as the new deal was being discussed in recent months, was that the Big Ten Network had acquired all of the league's programming rights back in 2016 through an undisclosed date. The length of that deal with the Big Ten Network from 2016 is carried at least through the current deal, which has been announced through the 2029-30 season.

This relationship was known by athletic directors, television executives at rival networks and officials in other leagues, even if it wasn't announced publicly. It flashed out into the public at various times, including Sports Business Journal reporting in April 2022 that two Fox senior executives were in the room when various media companies -- ESPN, Amazon, NBC and others -- met with the league about their television packages.

What this also essentially meant was the latest round of Big Ten television deals were effectively sub-license arrangements, in which both the Big Ten Network and Fox essentially controlled the rights and worked with the Big Ten to sub-license them off. That meant a majority of the value of the deal had already been sold.

"It was a joint negotiation with the conference and FOX working together and doing deals with these other networks," said an industry source. "They both needed each other to do the deals."

That factor is key to understanding the issues Petitti faces. There are two new partners -- NBC and CBS -- attempting to work out their longform deals. There's a familiar partner, Fox, that's riding shotgun on this bumpy ride, including being upset Warren promised a title game Fox controlled without permission.

The league and Fox had also been in talks with Amazon about the deal that ultimately went to NBC, but according to sources, there was late pushback by key campus stakeholders that some of the biggest brands weren't ready for part of a marquee package to only be available on streaming. That set up the push to get as much money as possible from NBC.

And it leaves the league facing a decision on a potential bonus for Warren, who didn't have a bonus clause tied to a television deal in his contract. Warren's predecessor, Jim Delany, got a bonus of more than $20 million that was announced in 2017, and he's still getting paid for it because he led the negotiation that sold all of the rights through this decade. (The bonus had been in Delany's contract prior to the deal.)

The league has brought in an outside search firm, Korn Ferry, to determine whether Warren's work with this television deal should bring him a bonus.

One certainty is that the Big Ten television deal, despite the size, has not satisfied many coaches around the league.

In a Big Ten Zoom call with Warren and the league's men's basketball coaches this summer after the deal was announced, sources say, Michigan State basketball coach Tom Izzo was critical of Warren for the lack of transparency and consultation on the deal.

Izzo recently said coaches weren't consulted by the league prior to the deal: "One thing about coaches, you're almost asking the wrong people because we're the last to know anything," Izzo told ESPN.

Izzo added that he has "concerns" on the amount of games available only on streaming and said that would be among his first questions to Petitti, as "it was not discussed with us [coaches] at all."

"Those are some things I'd like to see with the new commissioner, that there's some transparency in working together," Izzo said.

Izzo's concerns reverberate among the rest of the Big Ten coaches, as Ohio State coach Chris Holtmann added: "For our league to continue to grow and evolve in this new era, I think at the very minimum the veteran coaches like (Izzo and Purdue's Matt Painter) should have a direct line of communication and a voice in the conversation."

Ohio State football coach Ryan Day echoed Izzo's sentiment about communication and transparency.

"There was a collective disappointment among coaches on how the night game issue was handled," Day said. "We were surprised when it emerged, and there was no consultation on the change with coaches as a group prior to the television contract being announced."

 

Thanks for posting.  Some crazy stuff in there. 

Backs up what a lot of BIG people have said about Warren- politician who is all about appearances.

It's crazy that the BIG is even considering paying him a bonus after the way this was handled.  

Also- where was the BIG's general counsel and the Presidents when Warren was giving NBC night games and the CCG without the ability to do so ?  

It's stunning that no one caught this.  Did no one read the deal ?

Edited May 22, 2023 by USC Traveler

[Lone Star Horn 2010]

1 hour ago, USC Traveler said:

Thanks for posting.  Some crazy stuff in there. 

Backs up what a lot of BIG people have said about Warren- politician who is all about appearances.

It's crazy that the BIG is even considering paying him a bonus after the way this was handled.  

Also- where was the BIG's general counsel and the Presidents when Warren was giving NBC night games and the CCG without the ability to do so ?  

It's stunning that no one caught this.  Did no one read the deal ?

BIG's general counsel and the Presidents as the deal was being negotiated.

Read the contract??

[TKthunder2 4981]

5 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

There's tens of millions of dollars of value of the NBC primetime deal in flux, as Petitti has been racing to ensure it keeps as much of its original value as possible. Historically in the Big Ten, after the first weekend in November, schools were not required to play night games for myriad reasons -- health, recovery and campus logistics among them. These were known in league circles as "tolerances," and prior television contracts accounted for them.

Multiple sources told ESPN there's been pushback from a number of schools, including Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State, to play those late-November night games under the new contract. That leaves Petitti to figure out how to uphold a deal for hundreds of millions of dollars for primetime games without cooperation from some of the league's marquee teams for part of the regular season's most important month.

Athletic departments and coaches around the Big Ten say they were surprised November night games would be part of the deal. They weren't asked for permission to play them prior to the deal or informed of the change ahead of the deal, according to sources. At the same time, NBC wasn't aware until well after the initial contract was signed this summer that these big-brand schools had historic tolerances that were part of the prior television arrangements and would resist being available.

"NBC was surprised, and I was surprised," said Michigan athletic director Warde Manuel. "We had not discussed, and I had not discussed with anyone in the league to change the tolerances we had agreed upon years ago."

Within the industry, though, there was an expectation that, considering the scope of the deal, all schools would play in prime time.

Can someone explain this to me? They don’t want to play in prime time because of “health, recovery and campus logistics”?

How does playing a few hours later in the day a big deal? They sound like whiny bitches.

[Texas Wahoo 3383]

1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

Can someone explain this to me? They don’t want to play in prime time because of “health, recovery and campus logistics”?

How does playing a few hours later in the day a big deal? They sound like whiny bitches.

I think it’s because it’s fucking cold in the Midwest in November at night. 

[notre dame joe 172]

18 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Did Notre Dame get the number they were looking for from NBC/Peacock? I haven't heard a peep about it in months. 

It wasn't really a good faith offer.  Triple our income while we provide the same value.

9 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

Thanks for posting.  Some crazy stuff in there. 

Backs up what a lot of BIG people have said about Warren- politician who is all about appearances.

It's crazy that the BIG is even considering paying him a bonus after the way this was handled.  

Also- where was the BIG's general counsel and the Presidents when Warren was giving NBC night games and the CCG without the ability to do so ?  

It's stunning that no one caught this.  Did no one read the deal ?

Another reason why conferences are bad.  The schools have no idea how their future gets bargained.

[gatormarc 904]

8 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

I think it’s because it’s fucking cold in the Midwest in November at night. 

Has anyone mentioned to them that home playoff games will be in December at night?

[MonkeyDoughnut 10145]

On 5/20/2023 at 8:59 PM, Jabberwocky said:

 

The mega conferences just fast track the destruction of college football as it has been. No longer a regional game. Just a semi-pro, loose school affiliated minor league system.  With the online class offerings I'm betting there are athletes now that don't step into campus classrooms their entire time at a school.

[Wade 463]

14 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

Thanks for posting.  Some crazy stuff in there. 

Backs up what a lot of BIG people have said about Warren- politician who is all about appearances.

It's crazy that the BIG is even considering paying him a bonus after the way this was handled.  

Also- where was the BIG's general counsel and the Presidents when Warren was giving NBC night games and the CCG without the ability to do so ?  

It's stunning that no one caught this.  Did no one read the deal ?

Interesting article.  The most jaw-dropping thing for me is that the Big Ten Network (majority owned by Fox) owns the content, not the conference.  Fox execs attending negotiation sessions with rival networks.  They can't do deals without Fox's sign-off.  It's mind-boggling that the conference agreed to this arrangement.

[Hornius Emeritus 12420]

Pac-12 may be dead.

 

 

 

[gatormarc 904]

13 minutes ago, Wade said:

Interesting article.  The most jaw-dropping thing for me is that the Big Ten Network (majority owned by Fox) owns the content, not the conference.  Fox execs attending negotiation sessions with rival networks.  They can't do deals without Fox's sign-off.  It's mind-boggling that the conference agreed to this arrangement.

The fact that the hiccup with the conference title game happened suggests that Fox must've had some sort of isolated group acting on their behalf during the negotiations with preset rules.

Because the only other way around it would be Fox knew that they owned the rights but just sit back and the Big10 sell them again anyway.

 

[cochamps 1879]

15 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

Pac-12 may be dead.
If true, Larry Scott and the Pac 12 get what they deserve.  They are more guilty of arrogance than we ever have been.
 

 

 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

28 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

The mega conferences just fast track the destruction of college football as it has been. No longer a regional game. Just a semi-pro, loose school affiliated minor league system.  With the online class offerings I'm betting there are athletes now that don't step into campus classrooms their entire time at a school.

And the sad thing is, we have posters right here at Surly who welcome this new paradigm.  They want NFL 2.0, or NFL Minor League, or NFL Light....whatever you want to call it.

Just another example of people not understanding their brand and their market position.  College football was unique from the NFL, and it was that uniqueness that appealed to so many.   Yet, it is that uniqueness that people are wanting to eliminate in favor of a 32 team super league (maybe, just maybe, if they would expand it to 64 teams they can retain some of what people love about college football, but I'm doubtful they will and even at 64 it may still be such a change that the uniqueness of college football will still be lost).   A lot of that college atmosphere that people loved has already been eliminated via mega jumbotrons, less band playing in favor of more canned music through the jumbtron, advertising in the stadium everytime the clock stops, etc.

[Trojan Man 429]

41 minutes ago, Wade said:

Interesting article.  The most jaw-dropping thing for me is that the Big Ten Network (majority owned by Fox) owns the content, not the conference.  Fox execs attending negotiation sessions with rival networks.  They can't do deals without Fox's sign-off.  It's mind-boggling that the conference agreed to this arrangement.

The alternative is you don't partner with a major network to carry and promote your conference network, which is what the Pac 12 did (spoiler: it was a catastrophic failure).

[Hurtlocker 2208]

12 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

The alternative is you don't partner with a major network to carry and promote your conference network, which is what the Pac 12 did (spoiler: it was a catastrophic failure).

Yeah the SEC has this too.   To gain more money ESPN may need to outsource games to other networks.   Until 2034 the mouse owns all of their rights, just like Fox does for the B1G.    The only difference is the SEC is a straight rights deal, where the B1G has a 40% ownership stake in BTN.  

To @Trojan Man's point, you don't get all the exposure if you don't give something up.  

[Big Frog II 511]

The Pac12 is dead.  However, some of the schools don't realize it yet or perhaps don't want to.

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

2 hours ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

Pac-12 may be dead.

 

 

 

Doesn’t the “ESPN is out” report RE the Pac happen every month?

I honestly think they won’t get a deal but will stay together without TV and just sniff each other’s assholes and fade into complete obscurity 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

14 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Doesn’t the “ESPN is out” report RE the Pac happen every month?

I had the same thought.

[Josef Pwag 1728]

44 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Doesn’t the “ESPN is out” report RE the Pac happen every month?

 

...followed by the tweets refuting this claim from the Pac loyalists in the media. 

[gatormarc 904]

 

['stache 21774]

53 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Doesn’t the “ESPN is out” report RE the Pac happen every month?

I honestly think they won’t get a deal but will stay together without TV and just sniff each other’s assholes and fade into complete obscurity 

Same. It feels like settlement negotiations where one party gets up and leaves at an insulting offer, then a week later the other side backs off and they return to the  negotiating table. We'll see credible reports soon that ESPN is in contact again. I think the PAC will get a deal that's not as much as they want but enough for them to bide their time until the BIG absorbs UO and UW and maybe NoCal. 

5 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

 

I'm not reading that long ass article, but this makes no sense to me. Did UCLA and USC know this during their due diligence? Was the deal "you'll make a ton more money, we just don't know what it is yet." Is that really enough for regents to think they've satisfied their fiduciary obligation not even knowing for sure what the new payouts would be? We all know it's going to be a ton more than the pac, but you would think the bureaucrats would want to know for sure exactly how much more before voting yes (and for UCLA especially making their pitch to the UC regents that they have no choice but to leave Cal behind or die on the vine the same way). 

Edited May 22, 2023 by 'stache

[gatormarc 904]

6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I'm not reading that long ass article, but this makes no sense to me. Did UCLA and USC know this during their due diligence? Was the deal "you'll make a ton more money, we just don't know what it is yet." Is that really enough for regents to think they've satisfied their fiduciary obligation not even knowing for sure what the new payouts would be? We all know it's going to be a ton more than the pac, but you would think the bureaucrats would want to know for sure exactly how much more before voting yes (and for UCLA especially making their pitch to the UC regents that they have no choice but to leave Cal behind or die on the vine the same way). 

He's linking to the same article posted by @Francisco 2.0 above.

His snippets get the meat of it if you don't want to read the whole thing:

It doesn't sound like any of this is an issue for UCLA/USC. It's still a lot of cash and the November evening game issue doesn't affect them at all.

It's the existing members that are annoyed to find out that the deal isn't 99% done and they are being asked to make changes to keep the TV partners happy.

['stache 21774]

I mean, I wouldn't want to play at night in November in Wisconsin, it'll be cold af, and cause all sorts of scheduling problems with weather like Big 10 early season baseball games which regularly get called for weather.

[gatormarc 904]

6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I mean, I wouldn't want to play at night in November in Wisconsin, it'll be cold af, and cause all sorts of scheduling problems with weather like Big 10 early season baseball games which regularly get called for weather.

Sure, but these are the same people that have beaten the drum for decades that the SEC doesn't play "Real Football®" because only "Real Football®" is played in the snow and the only reason the SEC has won any championships is because the SEC doesn't play their games in the snow like "Real Football Teams®."

[USC Traveler 488]

2 hours ago, Uncle Nate said:

And the sad thing is, we have posters right here at Surly who welcome this new paradigm.  They want NFL 2.0, or NFL Minor League, or NFL Light....whatever you want to call it.

Just another example of people not understanding their brand and their market position.  College football was unique from the NFL, and it was that uniqueness that appealed to so many.   Yet, it is that uniqueness that people are wanting to eliminate in favor of a 32 team super league (maybe, just maybe, if they would expand it to 64 teams they can retain some of what people love about college football, but I'm doubtful they will and even at 64 it may still be such a change that the uniqueness of college football will still be lost).   A lot of that college atmosphere that people loved has already been eliminated via mega jumbotrons, less band playing in favor of more canned music through the jumbtron, advertising in the stadium everytime the clock stops, etc.

I agree that a 32 team superleague would be terrible, and I say that as someone who thinks USC to the BIG and UT/OU to the SEC are great moves for fans of those teams and conferences because we're going to get more games that are compelling every year in those conferences with 3-6-6 scheduling.  

But I also enjoy B12 games, and look forward to the B12 absorbing PAC schools and whichever worthwhile ACC schools don't go BIG/SEC.

Cincy, WV, Pitt and UL would be a great division in a 20-24 team B12.  Same with a division that has TX schools (and possibly OSU).  There are a lot of games in a 20-24 team B12 that people will tune in to watch, so there is real value to the networks.

Sankey and Petiti are smart guys who would understand the negative consequences of a 32 team superleague, so a BIG/SEC/B12 breaking away from the G5 with 60-64 teams is much more likely.  That wouldn't feel much different than what we already have.  I almost never watch G5 games.  I just don't care.  And 99% of the time, G5 vs P5 games aren't competitive.  We might see one-two G5 games on most teams' schedules anyway as tuneup/cupcake games each year.

If we do end up with BIG/SEC/B12 in a division of their own, would that really be much different ?  

 

[Jabberwocky 1666]

More no ESPN for the Pac tweets...

 

[bullet 1596]

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Doesn’t the “ESPN is out” report RE the Pac happen every month?

I honestly think they won’t get a deal but will stay together without TV and just sniff each other’s assholes and fade into complete obscurity 

Yes but then Kliavcoff gets Mandel or someone to claim ESPN is talking to them.

Of course, ESPN DOES have an existing contract with the Pac for the next 13 months, so I would hope they are talking.

[bullet 1596]

On 5/20/2023 at 6:56 PM, Trojan Man said:

I'm not buying that any school that ended up in the B1G or the SEC made a mistake with realignment.  Conferences exist to provide their members with money, exposure and compelling schedules.  Those two conferences are clearly the best by those metrics.  If continuing to play rivals and more regional schedules outweighed those benefits schools would stay put.  Had Maryland, Missouri and Rutgers remained in their old conferences there is a very good chance they would not get invited today and remain stuck on the outside looking in.  You could argue Colorado screwed up but they always wanted to be in a conference with a Californian presence, the Big 12 team they liked playing the most left for the B1G and they could still end up back in the Big 12.

I'd argue the opposite.  2012 A&M would not have done as well in the Big 12 as they did in the SEC.  They and Missouri tore shit up their first few years in their new conference because SEC teams were still largely using ball control dinosaur offenses, so the two new guys using offenses that played fast and tried to score every drive and started QBs who could throw the ball more than 10 yards instead of playing not to lose shook things up.  Manziel was an amazing college QB, but he wasn't replacing some walk on scrub.  A&M's final Big 12 QB was a top 10 pick who is still starting in the NFL (Tannehill) and they went 7-6 with him in 2011.  If 2012 A&M kept playing teams that knew what to expect from them and faced similar offenses every week their season would have played out differently than it did shock and awwing a bunch of SEC defenses that (back then) were built to stop between the tackles handoffs and might face 1 good QB all season.

I remember a number of years back Saban whining (when doesn't he?) about having to change how he recruited his defense.

[PittsburghTiger 6137]

On 5/20/2023 at 4:23 PM, John80 said:

Maryland is a basketball school that was in a great basketball conference and they only moved because their athletics department was in terrible financial shape. They had a lot of classic games against Duke and UNC and that's gone.

I have been told that Lenny Elmore said, before the move from the ACC something to the effect of, "Maryland athletics was broke while we were in the ACC and it will be broke in the Big"

They are horribly run.

[PittsburghTiger 6137]

It's time for the 72-team Super Best Friends Conference, divided by eight. Nine teams in each, eight conference games and all by region with your non-conference games rotating among the other divisions.

This is all so fucking stupid.

[Josef Pwag 1728]

3 minutes ago, PittsburghTiger said:

72-team Super Best Friends Conference

Nope.

24 in the SEC and 24 in the B1G. Their champs will play for the national title and control all of the meaningful postseason TV revenue. That is the path we are on. Nothing will stop it now.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

32 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

Nope.

24 in the SEC and 24 in the B1G. Their champs will play for the national title and control all of the meaningful postseason TV revenue. That is the path we are on. Nothing will stop it now.

Fuck the fans.  Fuck the old rivalries.  Fuck college football.

NFL Light!  

[Jabberwocky 1666]

 

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

It's time for the 72-team Super Best Friends Conference, divided by eight. Nine teams in each, eight conference games and all by region with your non-conference games rotating among the other divisions.
This is all so fucking stupid.

Here. Just do this

[Richard Kimball 1492]

7 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

With the online class offerings I'm betting there are athletes now that don't step into campus classrooms their entire time at a school.

Hi.

 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

16 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Here. Just do this

This makes so much sense, and there is not one logical reason why it should not be this way.

However, there is one illogical reason, and unfortunately it trumps everything....EGO.  

Too many egos in college football to ever allow this structure to happen.

Edited May 22, 2023 by Uncle Nate

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

18 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

This makes so much sense, and there is not one logical reason why it should not be this way.

However, there is one illogical reason, and unfortunately it trumps everything....EGO.  

Too many egos in college football to ever allow this structure to happen.

If you did one media rights package and then distribute payouts based on ratings, the big dogs would be rolling in cash.

The conference model is idiotic and has just become a tree fort for academics and dorks who care more about “prestige” than what makes sports fun.

[MonkeyDoughnut 10145]

This whole discussion is centered around football too. Side effect is it harms so many other college sports / experiences in the process.

Is it always going to be about money now or will it reach a point where the good of the game or college sports in general matter more?

[FartingDreamer 138]

On 5/20/2023 at 8:25 PM, Al_4_ISU said:

That cash isn’t doing jack shit for fans.

The game is objectively getting worse for most fans.  Eventually that will drive people away.

And the cash will dry up when people lose interest.

This, College Football was SO much different then the NFL and SO much more interesting because of the greater number of regional conferences and teams.  Eliminating all of the other programs to 32 teams that happen to belong to only 2 conference, will kill the interest in the sport that the uniqueness of CFB generated.  The pool of bluebloods will beat each other up and loose it's appeal over time while those fans of programs and regions cut out of the picture will tune out altogether.  It's a bad recipe for the sport.  

Edited May 22, 2023 by FartingDreamer

[TKthunder2 4981]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Here. Just do this

I just love how even in your high and mighty egalitarian model…you still left out Wake Forest.

[TKthunder2 4981]

54 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

This makes so much sense, and there is not one logical reason why it should not be this way.

However, there is one illogical reason, and unfortunately it trumps everything....$$$

FIFY

[billfromlaketravis 11362]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Here. Just do this

['stache 21774]

52 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

If you did one media rights package and then distribute payouts based on ratings, the big dogs would be rolling in cash.

The conference model is idiotic and has just become a tree fort for academics and dorks who care more about “prestige” than what makes sports fun.

Yup, and I think most would be cool with revenue splits based on ratings, which is what drives revenue anyway. It's sort of relegation and promotion but with dollars. If you're good and people watch, you get paid with the upper tier, if not, not. And programs like Michigan and FSU will probably rake in even in down years, so still happy. I wish the other sports played a role in this too, it's so completely ridiculous that we'll have UCF playing baseball and women's soccer in Utah. It's already dumb that WVU has to cross the Mississippi for every road trip in every sport. 

Edited May 22, 2023 by 'stache

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

10 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Why?  What part of that doesn’t look amazing to you?  To anyone who likes this sport?

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

26 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

I just love how even in your high and mighty egalitarian model…you still left out Wake Forest.

They might deserve it more than one of the far western schools, but I’d be willing to bet their attendance is less than almost every school in there.

There are 10-15 schools in this that have really tiny fanbases, but this is orderly, geographic, creates a nationally interesting playoff and gives all you blue blood prestige people lots of prestige games 

Edited May 22, 2023 by Al_4_ISU

[billfromlaketravis 11362]

Just now, Al_4_ISU said:

Why?  What part of that doesn’t look amazing to you?  To anyone who likes this sport?

What you not understand about Texas not wanting to play Big 12 schools?  Tech, Baylor, and OK State are all non starters for many, many reasons. 

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

1 minute ago, billfromlaketravis said:

What you not understand about Texas not wanting to play Big 12 schools?  Tech, Baylor, and OK State are all non starters for many, many reasons. 

How are they worse than the bottom half of the SEC?  You get OU, Aggy, LSU, and Arky annually and a big non conference slate to schedule all the blue bloods you want.

But I get it, you’re more interested in casting off a handful of schools that you hate for some weird prestige dork reasons.

[billfromlaketravis 11362]

Just now, Al_4_ISU said:

How are they worse than the bottom half of the SEC?  You get OU, Aggy, LSU, and Arky annually and a big non conference slate to schedule all the blue bloods you want.

But I get it, you’re more interested in casting off a handful of schools that you hate for some weird prestige dork reasons.

Tech : going through our pockets trying to get at the PUF. Legislative tantrum where they dragged our president in for some kangaroo court bullshit. 
 

Baylor: head coach enabled a culture of violence against women and largely went unpunished. Head basketball coach covered up a murder of one his players. Legislative tantrum. 
 

OK State: coffin sized field they refuse to enlarge. Officiating. 
 

We’re leaving to get away from these people. 

[Crockett 488]

18 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Why?  What part of that doesn’t look amazing to you?  To anyone who likes this sport?

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

7 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Tech : going through our pockets trying to get at the PUF. Legislative tantrum where they dragged our president in for some kangaroo court bullshit. 
 

Baylor: head coach enabled a culture of violence against women and largely went unpunished. Head basketball coach covered up a murder of one his players. Legislative tantrum. 
 

OK State: coffin sized field they refuse to enlarge. Officiating. 
 

We’re leaving to get away from these people. 

That’s not why you’re leaving. The SEC is full of bad actors.  You’re leaving for more money and more big home games.

Send Baylor out west with TCU, drop the AFA, send a Mississippi school or Kentucky west and shuffle Wake back into one of the south/eastern divisions 

[Okie State 3788]

Tech : going through our pockets trying to get at the PUF. Legislative tantrum where they dragged our president in for some kangaroo court bullshit. 
 
Baylor: head coach enabled a culture of violence against women and largely went unpunished. Head basketball coach covered up a murder of one his players. Legislative tantrum. 
 
OK State: coffin sized field they refuse to enlarge. Officiating. 
 
We’re leaving to get away from these people. 

You are so full of shit with this.