Conference Realignment

Status
Not open for further replies.
#151      

Serious Late

Serious Late
Peoria via Denver via Ann Arbor via Albuquerque vi
Serious Late
redwingillini11 said:
Maybe this fan base is swarming with masochists. But have some freaking pride in what a great institution the University of Illinois is. I’m sorry, but I do not want us to be associating with Illinois State or Ball State or Eastern Michigan on any level. We ARE better than that.
Click to expand...
I am really struggling to track the logic in "have some freaking pride in the university" with "if relegation happened we would be forever mired in the MAC!"

I have plenty of pride in my alma mater. That is why a system allowing relegation doesn't scare me.
 
#152      

Saturdaze

S
Saturdaze
Mr. Tibbs said:
the SEC faithful are all butthurt that the conference is not getting all the national pub that it was getting last year with the UT & OU expansion . that , and the real possibility thr B1G ends up with a larger media rights payout .

they are puzzled that they won’t be alone on the mountain top.
Click to expand...
To support that - ESPN is paying $300 million per year for SEC tier 1 rights, plus the conference championship game ($21.4 million per game).

CBS is rumored to be paying $350 million for BIG tier 2 rights SHARED with NBC ($26.9 million per game).

sports.yahoo.com

ESPN Signs $3 Billion Deal for SEC Football as CBS Era Nears End

Disney’s ESPN has finalized a deal to buy the rights to college football’s most-watched television package for $300 million per season—at least five times the $55 million per year fee that current rights holder CBS pays the conference, Sportico confirmed. ESPNs expected purchase was first...
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
 
#153      

illini80

illini80
Forgottonia
illini80
Serious Late said:
I am really struggling to track the logic in "have some freaking pride in the university" with "if relegation happened we would be forever mired in the MAC!"

I have plenty of pride in my alma mater. That is why a system allowing relegation doesn't scare me.
Click to expand...
I just don’t see the attraction. Frankly the only thing that keeps my interest is the memories of our occasional rise to compete with the the best teams in the conference and those fleeting feelings of being relevant. The idea of dropping down a level would leave me with zero interest in following or watching or sending money.

Not discussed in the article is the whole driving force behind all the realignment. Money, and tons of it. Equal shares of revenue is the leg propping us up now. No way are we getting $75-80M by playing MAC schools no one cares about. At least that’s how I see it.
 
#155      

Old.Edgy

O
Old.Edgy
Point-Illinois said:
I’m curious why I see people here in favor of relegation. There is a solid chance we would be relegated very quickly.

While being a doormat has been rough, at least we have a chance to play against some of the more elite teams in the country.

If we relegate down to a MAC level league…winning might be more common (though no guarantee) but it’d be against lower level teams that just don’t do it for me.
Click to expand...

IF (big if) we were to get relegated, wouldn't that make it more difficult for the 'super' teams to PAD their W/L records and therefore be marginally counter-productive ? ?
 
#157      

orange100

orange100
time to hop on the wife
orange100
redwingillini11 said:
Maybe this fan base is swarming with masochists. But have some freaking pride in what a great institution the University of Illinois is. I’m sorry, but I do not want us to be associating with Illinois State or Ball State or Eastern Michigan on any level. We ARE better than that.
Click to expand...
I attended a couple universities through my college career which was an interesting and curcuitous path. I grew up a townie Illini fan and I graduated from Illinois which was called uiuc at that time. Many years later, I worked for the university for a couple years and got to see how the sausage is made. Maybe sports-wise, we are better than ISU or eastern Michigan. Depends on the year. But after that time in-house, my sense of "university pride" is no more. I'll leave it at that.
 
#158      

the juiceman cometh

T
the juiceman cometh
Sure relegation/promotion is not preferable for certain (or all) schools that are already in the top tier by default. That's why it'll never be introduced into a sporting culture in which it doesn't exist (i.e. the US). But relegation/promotion is actually a huge net positive for the sport as a whole everywhere it exists. The value relegation and promotion provide is that they add excitement and importance to games that wouldn't otherwise matter. Illinois v. Indiana in football could go from a game nobody cares about to a game of huge importance. Imagine a scenario where the Northwestern and Illinois rivalry game also determines which of those schools would be relegated (or forced into a relegation playoff depending on how the whole thing is set up). That would be a high stakes competition!

On the flip side, imagine the excitement of being at the lower level and possibly having a chance to move up in the ranks. Could there be anything more exciting as a fan of a school like Kent St. or something. Again, I get it doesn't serve the Illinois self-interest, but on a basic, idealistic level, where sports is about meritocracy and the cream rising to the top, who wouldn't want a system where any team can, if they do the right things and just keep winning, force their way to the top?

It's all academic because there's no way it'll happen, but the reason people advocate for it is that it drastically cuts down on the number of games that do not matter and adds a ton of excitement to the sport as a whole, from top to bottom.
 
#159      

Calvin

C
Calvin
the juiceman cometh said:
Sure relegation/promotion is not preferable for certain (or all) schools that are already in the top tier by default. That's why it'll never be introduced into a sporting culture in which it doesn't exist (i.e. the US). But relegation/promotion is actually a huge net positive for the sport as a whole everywhere it exists. The value relegation and promotion provide is that they add excitement and importance to games that wouldn't otherwise matter. Illinois v. Indiana in football could go from a game nobody cares about to a game of huge importance. Imagine a scenario where the Northwestern and Illinois rivalry game also determines which of those schools would be relegated (or forced into a relegation playoff depending on how the whole thing is set up). That would be a high stakes competition!

On the flip side, imagine the excitement of being at the lower level and possibly having a chance to move up in the ranks. Could there be anything more exciting as a fan of a school like Kent St. or something. Again, I get it doesn't serve the Illinois self-interest, but on a basic, idealistic level, where sports is about meritocracy and the cream rising to the top, who wouldn't want a system where any team can, if they do the right things and just keep winning, force their way to the top?

It's all academic because there's no way it'll happen, but the reason people advocate for it is that it drastically cuts down on the number of games that do not matter and adds a ton of excitement to the sport as a whole, from top to bottom.
Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, that it's a net positive in making otherwise meaningless games interesting. But to do so, you need a meaningful ladder of leagues where it makes sense both competitively and financially to have teams moving up or down. I don't see that in college football for a lot of reasons that won't change. The structure is built off maximizing $ to the haves, and keeping out the have-nots. Teams that don't bring desirable fan bases or big revenue to the table won't be welcome regardless of having a good season. If somehow those meaningless games could bring in enough revenue to offset that, it could be a possibility I suppose, but I can't imagine that being the case.
 
#160      

mattcoldagelli

mattcoldagelli
The Transfer Portal
mattcoldagelli
Saturdaze said:
www.ajc.com

Michael Cunningham: SEC has better football, but Big Ten will have a lot more TV money

By now, we are used to the idea that college sports conferences are not bound by geography. It’s no longer so weird to see Maryland and Rutgers in the Big Ten, Missouri in the SEC or West Virginia as part of the Big 12. The next round of expansions will see Texas and Oklahoma join the SEC, and...
www.ajc.com www.ajc.com
Click to expand...
Nft Cope GIF by Digital Pratik
 
#161      

the juiceman cometh

T
the juiceman cometh
Calvin said:
I agree with a lot of what you're saying, that it's a net positive in making otherwise meaningless games interesting. But to do so, you need a meaningful ladder of leagues where it makes sense both competitively and financially to have teams moving up or down. I don't see that in college football for a lot of reasons that won't change. The structure is built off maximizing $ to the haves, and keeping out the have-nots. Teams that don't bring desirable fan bases or big revenue to the table won't be welcome regardless of having a good season. If somehow those meaningless games could bring in enough revenue to offset that, it could be a possibility I suppose, but I can't imagine that being the case.
Click to expand...
For sure this is true, and why it'll never happen. The next bit is where I think we get a chicken and egg issue. For those teams that don't have large fanbases and revenue, is that why they've been shut out of top level competition, or is it because they've been shut out of top level competition? I think there's plenty of evidence with expansion franchises in pro sports that new or underserved markets can become profitable with the introduction of a top flight team (and either stay profitable or not depending on actial results). Perhaps if a large school like Buffalo could be promoted and find success at the higher level it could develop that kind of following. That's kind of the promise and ideal of promotion.
 
#162      

Calvin

C
Calvin
the juiceman cometh said:
For sure this is true, and why it'll never happen. The next bit is where I think we get a chicken and egg issue. For those teams that don't have large fanbases and revenue, is that why they've been shut out of top level competition, or is it because they've been shut out of top level competition? I think there's plenty of evidence with expansion franchises in pro sports that new or underserved markets can become profitable with the introduction of a top flight team (and either stay profitable or not depending on actial results). Perhaps if a large school like Buffalo could be promoted and find success at the higher level it could develop that kind of following. That's kind of the promise and ideal of promotion.
Click to expand...

Just speculation on my part, but I think at this stage of maturity, growing the sport is difficult. Fanbase is aging, attention spans for 4 hour games is shrinking, and getting a program off the ground takes a big investment. I think the best chance for the have-nots to get a seat at the table is to set up some sort of semi-final playoff, and lobbying congress to pressure the NCAA for a guaranteed spot in the expanded playoff format, whenever that comes about. It would add some interest to games where people weren't paying attention, as well as outsider fan interest, possibly generating some revenue that could be used to negotiate a slot in the playoff. Everyone loves an underdog, and any school like that would add a guaranteed Cinderella to the field. No idea if it could work, but I think it would be better for the sport.
 
#165      

Calvin

C
Calvin
Mr. Tibbs said:
you do realize that the NCAA really has little to no influence in FBS football, and its about to become ZERO.
Click to expand...

True, but I think technically it's still called NCAA football. My point is that Congress could get involved under the right circumstances because there are so many outsider schools. It happened in 2009 when the format was being discussed, not that it really changed much in the end.
 
#166      

dbeaverfg

dbeaverfg
dbeaverfg
While I think relegation is a fun concept, it would throw a huge monkey wrench in scheduling, logistics, etc. Football schedules are made so far in advance now, along with travel plans, marketing and other side issues. I don't see how an athletic department could operate not knowing exactly who they would be playing next year.
 
#169      

leifur1

leifur1
leifur1
'Atlantic Seacoast Conference'

Army
Boston College
Connecticut
Maryland
Massachusetts
Navy
Old Dominion
Rutgers
Temple
Florida Atlantic
Florida International
Miami
 
#171      

mini30fan

mini30fan
mini30fan
L.A. Times: UC leaders propose limits on major athletics changes in wake of UCLA’s jump to Big Ten

"While there is no stopping the Bruins’ move — alongside cross-town rival USC — to the Big Ten in 2024, the UC Regents have voiced concerns about the unilateral decision that essentially excluded them from the process. The regents are expected to vote on the proposal to change the delegation of authority in similar situations during their September meeting."

Sounds like UCLA's move is still on track.
 
#172      

Mr. Tibbs

Mr. Tibbs
southeast DuPage
Mr. Tibbs
leifur1 said:
'Atlantic Seacoast Conference'

Army
Boston College
Connecticut
Maryland
Massachusetts
Navy
Old Dominion
Rutgers
Temple
Florida Atlantic
Florida International
Miami
Click to expand...
what is this post referring to ?
like Maryland or Rutgers would ever walk away from a 110 million per year payday for 8 million per year ?

NO ONE watches 75% of those teams on Saturday
 
Status
Not open for further replies.