Realignment talk not going away

[BurntOrange&White 38889]

On 5/9/2024 at 11:59 PM, Sbbruin said:

Bullshit.  But typical Cali bullsht.

Do yall actually have to pay the 10 million or can you just tell the system to fuck off?

[Sbbruin 21588]

37 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Do yall actually have to pay the 10 million or can you just tell the system to fuck off?

I expect lawsuits to be filed.  Cal has so royally fucked up their finances, they’re using this as an excuse to cover their asses.

[LTtxfan 48727]

On 5/9/2024 at 11:59 PM, Sbbruin said:

Bullshit.  But typical Cali bullsht.

San Fran/Oakland/Berkeley wtf is going on in that area ???

[John80 121]

If ever there was a large public university that should have dropped football, it's Cal. What little success they had was achieved with cutting corners and they have a faculty that is openly hostile to football and students are indifferent. The other UC schools have shown you don't need major sports to have a great university.

[AeroHorn 734]

Yeah, I was really expecting (and hoping) that Stanford and Cal would drop/downgrade football and become regional for other sports. They and their fans neither care nor need football. If the fan and institutional support is not there, why compete with those for whom football means more than just a game?

 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5721]

10 hours ago, LTtxfan said:

San Fran/Oakland/Berkeley wtf is going on in that area ???

You have San Francisco and Oakland and Berkeley and Palo Alto I mean what's the deal? 

[closetohumping 17302]

20 hours ago, LTtxfan said:

San Fran/Oakland/Berkeley wtf is going on in that area ???

Too busy researching shit:

 

2021 Research & Development GDP:
$163.379B--CALIFORNIA
$34.264B---WASHINGTON
$31.857B---MASSACHUSETTS
$29.887B---TEXAS
$28.131B---NEW YORK

['stache 21589]

This really feels like a conference that exists for the sole purpose of existing. No rhyme or reason why it didn’t just fold or drop to FCS like the WAC.

[Laxtonto 11879]

 

[Al_4_ISU 12375]

This really feels like a conference that exists for the sole purpose of existing. No rhyme or reason why it didn’t just fold or drop to FCS like the WAC.

It’s like how you can still go see something called Lynyrd Skynyrd that doesn’t feature a single original member.

[TKthunder2 4959]

11 hours ago, 'stache said:

This really feels like a conference that exists for the sole purpose of existing. No rhyme or reason why it didn’t just fold or drop to FCS like the WAC.

UTEP is the only school that’s been FBS the entire time. They’ve got to be asking how they fuck they got themselves into this Frankenstein’s monster of a conference.

[Al_4_ISU 12375]

It’s kinda wild how CUSA went from being one of the better mid majors to far and away the dregs of FBS so quickly.

[notre dame joe 171]

3 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

It’s kinda wild how CUSA went from being one of the better mid majors to far and away the dregs of FBS so quickly.

It seemed like their territory overlapped with the MAC and Sun Belt but they didn't have the programs with a bit of tradition. 

[TxEx84 370]

For those who want promotion/relegation in college football, we have it now. Except teams move up, few move down, and the leagues become larger.

 

Edited May 14 by TxEx84

[Texas Wahoo 3378]

10 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

UTEP is the only school that’s been FBS the entire time. They’ve got to be asking how they fuck they got themselves into this Frankenstein’s monster of a conference.

The problem is their location.  They left the WAC for CUSA before it collapsed (or left Division 1) and their location is just not good enough to get an invite anywhere else (and their athletics aren't good enough to make up for that).

[BurntOrange&White 38889]

2 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

The problem is their location.  They left the WAC for CUSA before it collapsed (or left Division 1) and their location is just not good enough to get an invite anywhere else (and their athletics aren't good enough to make up for that).

 

Going from Texas Western to UTEP was their downfall.

[TKthunder2 4959]

6 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

It seemed like their territory overlapped with the MAC and Sun Belt but they didn't have the programs with a bit of tradition. 

CUSA went from the top of the non BCS conferences along with the MWC to now the bottom of all FBS.

It was the fall of the Big East and subsequent formation of the American and CUSA’s backfill strategy of copying the Big Ten’s strategy of going after under performing teams in big markets and having a horrible tv deal with Stadium and Facebook.

CUSA raided the Sun Belt for FIU, Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky and LA Tech from the dying WAC; and the teams they did hit on like UNT, UTSA, FAU all got pulled up by the American conference.

Sun Belt added App State, Georgia Southern, Georgia State, and Coastal Carolina and made a MACtion style TV deal with ESPN which built a strong football brand and allowed them to pull Marshall, Southern Miss, and ODU from CUSA.

As a result CUSA has fallen from 3rd tier to 5th tier, while the Sun Belt has moved up 1 tier from 5th to 4th. No other conference, save the PAC12, has done worse for its membership over the last 2 decades.

[mdmost 42489]

Oregon St and Washington St fans might have an easier time finding their home games on television than Big 12 and ACC fans. They signed a deal with the CW and the games are produced by the Pac 12 Network. Their other games are on FS1. 

 

 

[TKthunder2 4959]

2 hours ago, TxEx84 said:

For those who want promotion/relegation in college football, we have it now. Except teams move up, few move down, and the leagues become larger.

 

Ideally when this is all said and done you’ll see:

S tier: SEC and B1G
A tier: B12
B tier: PAC(merged with MWC) and ACC (merged with The American)
C tier: SBC and MAC
D tier: CUSA

[statsman 5355]

1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

Ideally when this is all said and done you’ll see:

S tier: SEC and B1G
A tier: B12
B tier: PAC(merged with MWC) and ACC (merged with The American)
C tier: SBC and MAC
D tier: CUSA

Suppose FSU, Clemson,…hell, even UNC left the ACC. Why would a conference with BC, Pitt, VaTech, NCSU and Miami be on a lower tier than a conference led by Utah, Colorado, KSU and the rest?

[Park Gothic 4896]

47 minutes ago, statsman said:

Suppose FSU, Clemson,…hell, even UNC left the ACC. Why would a conference with BC, Pitt, VaTech, NCSU and Miami be on a lower tier than a conference led by Utah, Colorado, KSU and the rest?

This seems like a good time to remind people how the Sunbelt used to be the absolute worst conference in FBS. Worse than the MAC. And somehow it has morphed into one of the better conferences - I would put it on par with the MWC and better than the current version of the AAC. It's certainly not the best conference, but it's a fun conference that garners more viewers than it should based on the profile of its members.

How did they do this? By incorporating programs that care about football. That have fanbases, boosters, and AD who fucking love college football. They show up, they make signs, they bicker on the internet, they spend as much money as they can, and they basically treat football the way everyone treated it 30 years ago. 

Here is a good article about the SBC's strategy: https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/34454887/amid-college-football-chaos-sun-belt-conference-rivalries-fun-throwback

The Sun Belt is keeping its divisions, leaning hard into regional rivalries, and reconnecting long-missed matchups that were lost to previous rounds of conference realignment and teams leaping into the FBS ranks no matter where and how they did it. That strategy, once the standard in college sports, is now downright counter cultural. The Sun Belt represents stability and familiarity in a world where complaints of "I don't even recognize my favorite sport" are becoming louder by the day. That's no accident. "No, no, we were really deliberate. At the end of the day, we want fans to be able to travel to the games, but also games they want to go to," says commissioner Keith Gil.

That is why the Big 12 will be better than a conference with BC, Pitt, et al. Because Big 12 fans give a shit. Yeah, the schools are poor and the fanbases are small, but they show up. They are rabid about their teams. ISU football sucks, but they were willing to kill their baseball team just to keep it. The Big 12 is the Sunbelt of the P4. Who did the ACC just add in this last round of realignment? Cal and Stanford - two of the fart-sniffingest programs around that are openly antagonistic to football. In contrast, the Big 12 added Utah to pair with BYU, ASU and Arizona, and an admittedly shitty CU who, nonetheless, has a coach that drive engagement. People will still watch CU games if only to watch Deion and his ilk lose. 

The Big 12 will take the teams from the ACC that are worth a damn and have fans & ADs that care. The Sunbelt's strategy will work for them. They don't have to be the best or the biggest conference, they just have to be undeniably fun to watch. The ACC doesn't get it, and will either die or look like the CUSA in a few years. 

Edited May 14 by Park Gothic

[TKthunder2 4959]

35 minutes ago, statsman said:

Suppose FSU, Clemson,…hell, even UNC left the ACC. Why would a conference with BC, Pitt, VaTech, NCSU and Miami be on a lower tier than a conference led by Utah, Colorado, KSU and the rest?

Assuming if the flood gate opens that there wouldn’t be much left of the ACC. If the Big 12 has the same access and better TV deal spread across ESPN and FOX then why sit and make $10 mil less a year just to hang out with Boston College, Wake Forest, and SMU?

SEC - FSU, Clemson, UNC, UVA for 20

B1G - ND, Miami for 20

B12 - Pitt, Louisville, VA Tech, NCSU, Duke, GT, Syracuse, and maybe UConn for 24

[Al_4_ISU 12375]

33 minutes ago, statsman said:

Suppose FSU, Clemson,…hell, even UNC left the ACC. Why would a conference with BC, Pitt, VaTech, NCSU and Miami be on a lower tier than a conference led by Utah, Colorado, KSU and the rest?

Because those schools (not BC) will likely merge with the Big 12 for a large 3rd conference that competes in the same set of playoffs as the SEC and Big 10 (with less TV $ of course).

I assume that Pac-ACC tier is the schools that don’t seem to care about big time athletics much getting together.

I think this + unequal revenue sharing in the SEC and Big 10 is where it’s heading.

[Al_4_ISU 12375]

18 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Assuming if the flood gate opens that there wouldn’t be much left of the ACC. If the Big 12 has the same access and better TV deal spread across ESPN and FOX then why sit and make $10 mil less a year just to hang out with Boston College, Wake Forest, and SMU?

SEC - FSU, Clemson, UNC, UVA for 20

B1G - ND, Miami for 20

B12 - Pitt, Louisville, VA Tech, NCSU, Duke, GT, Syracuse, and maybe UConn for 24

This is very close to how I see it unfolding.  

[TrashMaster G 17297]

5 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

The problem is their location.  They left the WAC for CUSA before it collapsed (or left Division 1) and their location is just not good enough to get an invite anywhere else (and their athletics aren't good enough to make up for that).

If only UTEP could move out of El Paso...

['stache 21589]

Is Miami really a TV draw anymore? It's been 20 years since they were really good. Nebraska still has a huge fanbase and TV draw, even after 20 years of suck. Miami always felt more like a bandwagon fanbase when they were the "bad boys" of college football but not a super loyal large fanbase through thick and thin. Maybe I'm wrong.

Edited May 14 by 'stache

[BurntOrange&White 38889]

3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Is Miami really a TV draw anymore? It's been 20 years since they were really good. Nebraska still has a huge fanbase and TV draw, even after 20 years of suck. Miami always felt more like a bandwagon fanbase when they were the "bad boys" of college football but not a super loyal large fanbase through thick and thin. Maybe I'm wrong.

I think when they're good they are a TV draw because they are seen as a villain.

[thunderlounge 7642]

42 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Assuming if the flood gate opens that there wouldn’t be much left of the ACC. If the Big 12 has the same access and better TV deal spread across ESPN and FOX then why sit and make $10 mil less a year just to hang out with Boston College, Wake Forest, and SMU?

This is on the right track. Think about who is paying for what here. 
 

SEC: ESPN
B1G: Fox
B12: ESPN & Fox
ACC: ESPN

(not including mini partners)

Looking at that both from a market competition side, and a financial side, it makes perfect sense for each major broadcast partner to have a conference on their own, as well as one they split.

To me that signals potential, and seems like where it’s headed. The only thing standing in the way is the ACC, but their extension hasn’t kicked in yet, right? ESPN could be fine with the ACC imploding, with those left that care about football jumping to the b12.

Now they have their separation, enough teams, and no barriers to a new league structure. All while maintaining a significant majority of the fans.

 

[JWinTX 50]

There really needs to be levels of play that are based on a combination of capacity, budget, and TV ratings. Each level would have division play and then playoffs. These are the 30 brands that combine all of this with CFB history, championships, and prestige. Add in whoever you want, but that makes the slope very slippery for the top level.

Washington, Oregon, USC, UCLA, Notre Dame, Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas, Texas A&M, LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida, FSU, Miami, Georgia, South Carolina, Clemson, North Carolina, Virginia and Virginia Tech.   

The next level would include these 40 brands: 

Stanford, Cal, Washington State. Oregon State, Arizona State, Arizona, Utah, BYU, Boise State, Colorado, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, UH, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Kansas, Mizzou, Iowa State, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana, Cincy, Pitt, WVU, Maryland, BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, NC State, Kentucky, Louisville, Duke, Georgia Tech, UCF, Ole Miss. Mississippi State, and Memphis.

The next level is everyone else who wants to meet some nebulous standard--rest of schools not listed above in the G5s + and FCS schools that want to move up to this level (70-80 schools).

[SimonBolivar 10697]

8 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

The problem is their location.  They left the WAC for CUSA before it collapsed (or left Division 1) and their location is just not good enough to get an invite anywhere else (and their athletics aren't good enough to make up for that).

Is El Paso that bad? It's certainly an out there destination but they have a metro pop of 865k (Juarez is another 2.5 million people but they don't watch UTEP sports) and an easily accessible airport. That seems good enough for the SunBelt/MWC to me? I think it's more about the AD than El Paso itself.

Edited May 14 by SimonBolivar

[TKthunder2 4959]

2 hours ago, 'stache said:

Is Miami really a TV draw anymore? It's been 20 years since they were really good. Nebraska still has a huge fanbase and TV draw, even after 20 years of suck. Miami always felt more like a bandwagon fanbase when they were the "bad boys" of college football but not a super loyal large fanbase through thick and thin. Maybe I'm wrong.

Posted by BO&W 1 page back

 

Miami would be #9 in both the SEC/B1G beating out Iowa/Washington and Tennessee/Ole Miss. They’d be #1 in the Big 12.

[statsman 5355]

4 hours ago, 'stache said:

Is Miami really a TV draw anymore? It's been 20 years since they were really good. Nebraska still has a huge fanbase and TV draw, even after 20 years of suck. Miami always felt more like a bandwagon fanbase when they were the "bad boys" of college football but not a super loyal large fanbase through thick and thin. Maybe I'm wrong.

They were never a draw. They did, however, win like six MNCs in less than 20 years

[Deej 76218]

1 hour ago, JWinTX said:

There really needs to be levels of play that are based on a combination of capacity, budget, and TV ratings. Each level would have division play and then playoffs. These are the 30 brands that combine all of this with CFB history, championships, and prestige

 

1 hour ago, JWinTX said:

Texas A&M

[Chopper 16666]

You're not going to be able to split UNC and NCSU so easily. Earlier this year the board of regents that controls the state system gave themselves explicit power to approve any conference move because it could cause negative impact on the finances of either one of the schools. It was a reaction to UCLA's move and its supposed impact on Cal. A change in conference by UNC would first require approval by the NC system regents and will make a move to a new conference by UNC much less profitable for them and more difficult.

The requirement to gain advance approval of the regents is probably an attempt to bind UNC and NCSU together.

Also, what would cause much more in-state controversy is that while the regents obviously don't control the other 2 (private school) members of the ACC from the state of North Carolina, they've guaranteed a huge political fight instead of one school being able to act in its own best interests. IOW if you think what's gone down with UCLA has been ridiculous, North Carolina will be far worse and more impactful on each ACC member from NC.

[TKthunder2 4959]

5 minutes ago, Chopper said:

You're not going to be able to split UNC and NCSU so easily. Earlier this year the board of regents that controls the state system gave themselves explicit power to approve any conference move because it could cause negative impact on the finances of either one of the schools. It was a reaction to UCLA's move and its supposed impact on Cal. A change in conference by UNC would first require approval by the NC system regents and will make a move to a new conference by UNC much less profitable for them and more difficult.

The requirement to gain advance approval of the regents is probably an attempt to bind UNC and NCSU together.

Also, what would cause much more in-state controversy is that while the regents obviously don't control the other 2 (private school) members of the ACC from the state of North Carolina, they've guaranteed a huge political fight instead of one school being able to act in its own best interests. IOW if you think what's gone down with UCLA has been ridiculous, North Carolina will be far worse and more impactful on each ACC member from NC.

I love these…people said the same about Udub and Wazzu.

 

[Texas Wahoo 3378]

2 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

Is El Paso that bad? It's certainly an out there destination but they have a metro pop of 865k (Juarez is another 2.5 million people but they don't watch UTEP sports) and an easily accessible airport. That seems good enough for the SunBelt/MWC to me? I think it's more about the AD than El Paso itself.

Obviously if they were winning championships it probably wouldn't matter, but El Paso is the 91st ranked media market (behind places like Champaign, Shreveport, Charleston, etc.) and not close to any others that El Paso would probably draw from.  No one in Houston/Dallas/San Antonio probably watch them, even when they are good.

They would be outside of the conference maps for both the Sun Belt and the MWC, especially the Sun Belt:

They're not that far from UNM, but the MWC already left UTEP behind once (along with SMU, TCU, etc.), so I doubt they would want them back.

[Evil Bill Obrien 3024]

2 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

Is El Paso that bad? It's certainly an out there destination but they have a metro pop of 865k (Juarez is another 2.5 million people but they don't watch UTEP sports) and an easily accessible airport. That seems good enough for the SunBelt/MWC to me? I think it's more about the AD than El Paso itself.

Think their chief problem isn’t that El Paso is inherently a bad city/market, it’s that you are playing FBS football in the state of Texas but compared to all of the other FBS schools in the state and the recruiting grounds where they get players and the cities were their alumni live, El Paso may as well be on the surface of the moon. 

Edited May 15 by Evil Bill Obrien

[GreenspointTexas 9386]

El Paso is one of the most underrated cities in America

 

As for UTEP… well…. at least they have more national championships than aggy

 

 

and they have the 2nd most national championships of any school in Texas

[TKthunder2 4959]

50 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

El Paso is one of the most underrated cities in America

 

As for UTEP… well…. at least they have more national championships than aggy

 

 

and they have the 2nd most national championships of any school in Texas

Pleasantly surprised by that. I would have bet good money that Houston was #2 with all the golf ones they won pre2000.

[TKthunder2 4959]

 

18 games basketball schedule in the SEC. No surprise that the teams we play twice are OU, Arkansas, and aggy.

Mild surprise that aggy and OU play twice.

[JWinTX 50]

2 hours ago, Deej said:

 

Good point…maybe I should’ve said “and them”

[Deej 76218]

aggy has zero business being in the top tier. 

['stache 21589]

11 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Obviously if they were winning championships it probably wouldn't matter, but El Paso is the 91st ranked media market (behind places like Champaign, Shreveport, Charleston, etc.) and not close to any others that El Paso would probably draw from.  No one in Houston/Dallas/San Antonio probably watch them, even when they are good.

They would be outside of the conference maps for both the Sun Belt and the MWC, especially the Sun Belt:

They're not that far from UNM, but the MWC already left UTEP behind once (along with SMU, TCU, etc.), so I doubt they would want them back.

The MWC took back some of the old WAC schools they originally left behind. El Paso fits the footprint. I think they are just so isolated from the rest of Texas but are still identified as uniquely Texan so they just don’t have an appeal outside of alum and residents of El Paso.  Being really bad competitively hasn’t helped either. I think they belong in the MWC but understand why they are stuck with CUSA.

Edited May 15 by 'stache

[BurntOrange&White 38889]

 

 

[Hurtlocker 2208]

1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

This seems to be the biggest part of this to me:

Quote

Also as part of the terms, plaintiffs will agree to cooperate with the NCAA’s years-long congressional lobbying effort “regarding antitrust exemption,” the document notes. NCAA and conference leaders plan to continue lobbying lawmakers in a post-settlement world. They hope Congress will codify the settlement agreement with legislation to offer a more permanent solution or, at the very least, grant the NCAA protection to enforce its rules and deem athletes as students and not employees.

 

[TrashMaster G 17297]

11 hours ago, Deej said:

aggy has zero business being in the top tier. 

Legends in their own minds.

[Texas Wahoo 3378]

UVA and NC State are playing a non-conference home and home in 2025 and 2026.  Probably not realignment related, but you never know.

 

 

[NCMountaineer 99]

Interesting, though there's no chance the move happens before 26 IMO. 

Edited May 15 by NCMountaineer

[Sbbruin 21588]

 

[TKthunder2 4959]

1 minute ago, Sbbruin said:

 

As long as that doesn’t get extended I’d bet good with that if I’m UCLA. You guys going to be required to play them annually OOC?