Conference Realignment

Status
Not open for further replies.
#152      
ChiefGritty
Pikeillinifan said:
I say that thinking if boosters are spending their $ on players NIL $, wouldn’t that leave fewer $ for donations to athletic departments?
Click to expand...
Exactly right, but when we're talking about "competitiveness" are we talking about a transfer linebacker or a women's golf facility?

Donors spent indirectly on football players in the old world. Now they can (legally) directly buy the real thing.

It's a very different world, we have only scratched the surface.

champaignchris said:
The reporting that the Big 10 doesn’t want to be the cause of the PAC 12’s disintegration is pretty rich.
Click to expand...
It really is unbelievable. And then in the next sentence "oh, they'll take even MORE teams".

It does lend credence to the idea that this is all just politicking on behalf of getting them a better TV deal. Cal is Blockbuster Video now, no one wants Cal.
 
#155      
Old.Edgy
champaignchris said:
The reporting that the Big 10 doesn’t want to be the cause of the PAC 12’s disintegration is pretty rich.

They crippled the horse but don’t want to be the one who pulls the pistol’s trigger. And then they’ll happily pick the bones clean after the deed is done.
Click to expand...
I only brought that up because of the reporting by Dennis Dodd... who included this in his reporting...
 
#157      
Epsilon
mattcoldagelli said:
I will just put the marker down that you absolutely cannot take Cal and thus can probably not take Stanford.
Click to expand...
Seems everyone thinks the NoCal market isn’t even a relevant thing anymore. Not sure I believe that’s really true. I think the real stepchildren are Oregon State and Wazzou.
 
#162      
IllinoisssssssVarsity
Champaignheat said:
If the Big Ten goes to 20 schools, how about this? (I don't really like it but)

Pacific:

USC
UCLA
Oregon
Washington
Stanford

Atlantic:

Penn St.
Rutgers
Maryland
Ohio St.
Michigan St.

Central:

Michigan
Indiana
Purdue
Notre Dame
Wisconsin

Midwest:

Nebraska
Iowa
Minnesota
Illinois
Northwestern

A 10 game conference schedule; Play your division, play another division and play one rival (that way you still get Michigan-Ohio St, Illinois-Purdue, Minnesota-Wisconsin) or something different if the two divisions play each other that year. You could play everyone at least once every three years.

This stinks but we would get the west coast and Notre Dame involved.
Click to expand...

Idk if it would be logistically possible, but play your division (4 games), 2 protected rivalries (6 games), and then nfl style play the teams who finished in the same place you did in their division for 9 total conference games. It’s not relegation but you will generally have a team or 2 turn it around because they’re playing the 4th placed team 3 times and win them all. Win your 3 non cons and you got a bowl game.
 
#163      
Joel Goodson
TentakilRex said:
Unless can confirm that this Gentics56 is a real insider, our board should dumpster him/her as a source!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686865271665922048

If Genetics56 is a legit source, the rest of the B1G should look at Nebraska with a worried eye.
Click to expand...

lol, things changed quickly. the inability of the PAC to secure a decent package, Colorado bolting, they're wobbling. so the BIG and FOX are expected to sit on their thumbs because they said they were focused on integrating USC and UCLA before all this went down? c'mon
 
#165      
Joel Goodson
champaignchris said:
The reporting that the Big 10 doesn’t want to be the cause of the PAC 12’s disintegration is pretty rich.

They crippled the horse but don’t want to be the one who pulls the pistol’s trigger. And then they’ll happily pick the bones clean after the deed is done.
Click to expand...

did the BIG cripple the horse or did USC and UCLA? that the PAC is unable to secure a decent media contract speaks volumes about their landscape

bringing in UW and UO under half shares is shrewd business. bringing them in at full shares (with USC and UCLA) would have been a debacle.
 
#166      
Illini in Italy
Joel Goodson said:
sounds like pure BS to me. rationalization. the numbers are what the numbers are. it definitely doesn't help that most college football fans are checked out by the time a lot of left coast games are on. is that bias?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't think he's gonna let facts like the population distribution across the US stop his roll . . .
IMG_0827.jpeg
 
#167      
fuddrules
Joel Goodson said:
did the BIG cripple the horse or did USC and UCLA? that the PAC is unable to secure a decent media contract speaks volumes about their landscape

bringing in UW and UO under half shares is shrewd business. bringing them in at full shares (with USC and UCLA) would have been a debacle.
Click to expand...
Didn't USC initiate the marriage? Then again it's always hard to know if what is being published is real or a red herring.
 
#168      
Joel Goodson
fuddrules said:
Didn't USC initiate the marriage? Then again it's always hard to know if what is being published is real or a red herring.
Click to expand...

The Big Ten was pursued by those two schools - and neither side has debated that very significant point. At no time did the Big Ten pull them out of the PAC-12 - they left on their own volition.
 
#169      
ChiefGritty
There is a palpable spirit of "the NFL-ization of college football is an inevitability, let's just get it over with" in the current round of chatter.

Can someone explain to me why Illinois would vote for that? Why Purdue would vote for that? Why Maryland would vote for that?

A big part of the sell to these schools in the first place of all this ridiculous expansion was strengthening us against the national scene because of the financial and visibility dominance of the Big Ten. But now instead we're inviting the national scene into the tent, giving our football teams less access to the scarce resource of national broadcast TV slots, and LOSING money?

What do we, the constituents of the Big Ten Conference, get out of this?

Less visibility less money is a bad deal, vote no.

(For the record, I remain very sure no invite will actually happen. Largely for the above reasons. Dilution dilution dilution. The question of what the most valuable group per-team is was already painstakingly researched and decided, this is a settled question.)
 
#170      
JJE
PAC 12- on life support
BIG 12- Making case to be 3rd super conference
ACC- Fragile, collapse imminent

I think we might be heading to the chaotic free for all part of expansion.
 
#171      
ChiefGritty
JJE said:
PAC 12- on life support
BIG 12- Making case to be 3rd super conference
ACC- Fragile, collapse imminent

I think we might be heading to the chaotic free for all part of expansion.
Click to expand...
Heading?

Also unless you're defining "super conference" by sheer numbers, the Big 12 shouldn't be in the same sentence as the B1G/SEC.

It's funny how they're winning the narrative by their eagerness to accept second tier status. If any school in that league had the slightest prayer for a B1G/SEC invite they would be banging the door down.

(I never like the tone of statements like that, I don't mean to sound like some arrogant Big Ten partisan, as you guys know I hate all of this, but I am also frustrated when people fail to register that the Power Five system is completely, irrevocably dead. That version of college sports is over.)
 
#172      
Illini in Italy
ChiefGritty said:
Heading?

Also unless you're defining "super conference" by sheer numbers, the Big 12 shouldn't be in the same sentence as the B1G/SEC.

It's funny how they're winning the narrative by their eagerness to accept second tier status. If any school in that league had the slightest prayer for a B1G/SEC invite they would be banging the door down.

(I never like the tone of statements like that, I don't mean to sound like some arrogant Big Ten partisan, as you guys know I hate all of this, but I am also frustrated when people fail to register that the Power Five system is completely, irrevocably dead. That version of college sports is over.)
Click to expand...
In my little mind college sports (certainly football and basketball) is already over. We're entering (if not already there) the era of being the professional minor leagues of the NFL and the NBA.
 
#173      
Qwiksilvur
Idk that the Loyalty community hasn’t registered that. Financially that era is over and it’s the Big2 and sub 2/3. However, recruits are still choosing to go to the sub 2/3 over the Big2 at significant rates, which means competitiveness wise the power 5 era isn’t over. To me, until you see recruits shift toward the big2 conferences in an identifiable way, the power 5 still exists competitively.

See: Lightfoot going to the ACC instead of the Big10
 
#174      
ChiefGritty
Qwiksilvur said:
However, recruits are still choosing to go to the sub 2/3 over the Big2 at significant rates, which means competitiveness wise the power 5 era isn’t over. To me, until you see recruits shift toward the big2 conferences in an identifiable way, the power 5 still exists competitively.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, and I think recruits, parents, and high school coaches are in the same boat as message board posters, journalists, and University presidents. They haven't quite digested what has happened yet.

When the schools actually change conferences and the new media deals are fully operational, it will start to kick in.

The "sub 2/3" as you say are just going to have very little access to network or ESPN1 slots during 11AM-10-PM Saturdays and aren't going to have many headline-making games.
 
#175      
Joel Goodson
Qwiksilvur said:
Idk that the Loyalty community hasn’t registered that. Financially that era is over and it’s the Big2 and sub 2/3. However, recruits are still choosing to go to the sub 2/3 over the Big2 at significant rates, which means competitiveness wise the power 5 era isn’t over. To me, until you see recruits shift toward the big2 conferences in an identifiable way, the power 5 still exists competitively.

See: Lightfoot going to the ACC instead of the Big10
Click to expand...

give it some time
citing specific cases (e.g. Lightfoot) doesn't adhere to the Central Limit Theorem

when the BIG starts paying its players (~10% of media revenues?), that will supercharge the transition
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back