Reliant?
Teams want to win championships. You need to play in the BCS for that. Unless it all gets pitched. But as long as it exists, teams will want to maximize their ability to get in.
Conference Realignment
- Status
Teams want to win championships. You need to play in the BCS for that. Unless it all gets pitched. But as long as it exists, teams will want to maximize their ability to get in.
Make north-south divisions with the line running from San Jose to Detroit. IL would lose the annual divisional rivalry with Northwestern but would play IU, PU, PSU, OSU, Rutgers, Maryland, USC and UCLA every year. The biggest flaw in that line of demarcation is Michigan and Ohio State would be in different divisions - so TV will veto that.
If divisions return, I think we would have to go to 10 conference games.
Would we eventually go to a closed conference schedule and play only conference opponents all 12 games? Make one of those cross division games a protected game (scUM and O$U. UI and NW, for instance).
I HOPE we return to divisions based on location. Leaders and Legends? NEVER AGAIN! We are not English soccer. No relegation.
If divisions return, I think we would have to go to 10 conference games.
Would we eventually go to a closed conference schedule and play only conference opponents all 12 games? Make one of those cross division games a protected game (scUM and O$U. UI and NW, for instance).
I HOPE we return to divisions based on location. Leaders and Legends? NEVER AGAIN! We are not English soccer. No relegation.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
I prefer the divisions, as I think it's the closest we will get (at least in the foreseeable future) to the "old" type of conferences where you are familiar with the teams and play them all the time ... I have definitely developed much more interest/familiarity with the teams in the West than I have for those in the East. While that sucks in some ways, it is arguably better than having just ONE protected opponent each year - a rivalry game many Illini fans don't care much about.
The problem is the West Coast schools ... if we went up to 20 and got another West Coast team, you could conceivably have four geographically sensible pods. However, as it currently stands with divisions, some teams (likely Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, potentially us, etc.) would be playing the four West Coast schools every year and would have a lot more of a travel burden. Ideally, you could isolate those schools out West, have a "West Midwest" division, an "East Midwest/Great Lakes" division and then an "East Coast" division to incorporate PSU, Rutgers, Maryland and somebody else.
Mr. Tibbs
- southeast DuPage
TV money is driving the bus. They want 2-3 big time matchups EVERY WEEKEND
No way an even split of money survives this scenario. The 'lower' division will be squeezed out eventually.
Though I am starting to lose my ability to care...Illinois has won the conference 3 times in my life, statistically the odds are not materially different in the new world. Go let the Michigans and the Alabamas stomp each other every year for millions, as long as I can still enjoy a fall afternoon vs. Iowa or Purdue, I guess I'll be fine.
band camp
- STL City
BCS died in 2013. RIP.
Just mentioned out of habit. Pretend it never happened! Lol
I think it will all get pitched.
band camp
- STL City
Lol...no problem.
The ONLY wiggle room I see in this scenario is ESPN is bleeding cash, as is its parent Disney... Lots of layoffs already announced and probably more to come. So if their financial situation gets much murkier, there MIGHT be some shakeups which could cause contracts to be modified... I don't necessarily predict this will happen, but it does fall within the realm of possibility...
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
Wouldn't it be amazing if the thing that breaks that deal is not that it's too little money, but that it's too much?
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
Ohio State already sees only the elite handful of teams in the country as meaningful competition already, and the 12-team playoff is only going to send that into hyperdrive and train the whole country to look at the landscape in that way.
At that point the "legacy" conferences and that system of scheduling just becomes a weird parochial appendage. Why are the schools in the national championship competition spending half of their limited number of games playing these nobodies who don't matter?
Once you abandon the idea that regional, historical conferences and their web of rivalry and cultural affinity are the essence and bedrock of college football, the base upon which the very notion of a "national champion" even arises, everything flows downhill toward NFL-ization, there's no limiting principle.
All this stuff about "Ohio State doesn't want to go 8-4" comes from the cultural language of college football in which "8-4" means "not a nationally relevant contender". But the Patriots or Chiefs or whoever are fine going 11-6. It's all a question of context.
Ohio State is competing for a national championship under any framework. They aren't maximizing their money under a framework where they're playing Northwestern and Purdue. The market will squeeze that out eventually.
In this iteration, It feels like the NFL is more traditional and regional. My Vikings have played in the black & blue division of the upper midwest since they're inaugural season. And they play those teams 2x each season.
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
Yeah I'm going to start asking some definitions for what people mean when they say "NFL-ization"
- do you mean the game won't have heated regional rivalries? Are you familiar with the AFC North?
- do you mean there won't be utility for consistently bad teams? This Chicago Bears fan would like to break some news to you.
- do you mean weird, nonsensical traditions can't survive? I'll get back to you after watching the Lions on Thanksgiving Day for the fourth straight decade of my life.
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
Fair enough.
"A closed system with 20-40ish teams (much smaller than current major college football) playing only against each other in a model where the regular season's sole competitive meaning is to eliminate the bottom tier of teams and seed the expansive playoff where the actual meaningful honors are determined"
It would be accurate to say, generally speaking, that the above definition unites America's four major professional sports, but is unlike the way almost all other sporting competitions in the world are set up. The global sports and entertainment industry looks at America's four major professional sports as rich and successful market leaders and believes that the above defined structure is good and something they should seek to emulate. And my contention is that they're completely wrong, and the above defined structure is actually about as bad, uninteresting and charmless a way to set up a sporting competition as you could possibly devise and America's major pro sports have succeeded DESPITE the extent they've adhered to that system over the years.
Last edited:
altgeld88
- Arlington, Virginia
That's a wonderful photo; I don't believe I've ever seen it. Thanks for posting it.
dgcrow
- Kelso, WA
I went to Washington as a grad student many years ago. Boggles my mind that the Illini could be playing the Huskies in Husky stadium in a Big 10 conference game.
altgeld88
- Arlington, Virginia
I feel you. I took road trips through the Pac NW in '90 and '96 and visited Husky and Autzen Stadiums both times. Never would have guessed then where we'd be in 2023. I mean, frankly, 2023 itself was inconceivable to me in 1990 and '96!
dgcrow
- Kelso, WA
I attended the 1995 Illinois - Oregon game in Autzen. Heartbreaking loss for the Illini.
NFL and college football are like coke and pepsi. They are both great in their way, they are different and it's great they both exist. As coke found out in the 80's, we don't need or want 2 pepsi's and we don't need or want 2 NFL's. College football is great as is, but won't be great if it turns into NFL-lite
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
[Skip Holtz, piping up from the back of the room] "Uh we already HAVE an NFL-lite, thankyouverymuch"
I agree that I don't think 8-4 is the problem. But if you put all of the best teams together and you just play Tier 1 teams like (USC,ORE,MICH,OSU,PSU,CLEM,ND,LSU,BAMA,TX,OK,FL,GA) then teams of that caliber are going to be going 2-10 consistently and those fanbases freak out over much less. In this situation even mighty OSU is a qb injury away from a terrible record.
And whose to say that some of those Tier 1 teams don't start to consistently lose a lot, every year, until they share a reputation not so different than Nebraska today. A has been.
Maybe the NW's and Purdue's get squeezed out eventually, but will the schools first get rid of guarantee games where you pay Akron, Kent St, whoever, like a million dollars to play you in favor of more conference games? Games that should be more competitive with a better shot to hold TV viewers a full 3 hours.
Mr. Tibbs
- southeast DuPage
this phrase can be uttered for about 2 games every year, since we started playing the game 130 years ago
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
Whole lot of orange in that photo!! I remain impressed that we brought a very large following both times we have played in the Rose Bowl in the "modern era," even though both were against literal LA schools. The fan base is there.
On that note and responding to some other comments since my last one ... fair enough on some points. I guess the question becomes does Illinois get included in a 30-team "super" league? I obviously don't know and we are not a shoe-in, but I would argue many fans saying no right away are being too harsh on us. I admit this relies on optimistic forecasting, but I think "Illini Football" after 5-6 seasons under Bielema where we are going to bowls and now consistently filling a 60k+ stadium has as much value as most programs. Really, I would say the list of programs that provide practically non-debatable, intrinsic value to a conference that absolutely every league would move heaven and earth for is not all that long ... I think these schools (using current conferences) are the only ones that check off multiple boxes (huge national fan bases, massive alumni bases willing to pony up for NIL, great facilities, fertile instate recruiting, large instate populations with which they are the most popular teams, etc.) on a hypothetical "conference entrance" checklist:
Big Ten
Michigan
Ohio State
Penn State
SEC
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
LSU
Tennessee
Texas A&M
Big XII
Oklahoma
Texas
Pac-12
USC
ACC
Nobody ... maybe Florida State
Independent/Other
Notre Dame
Some people will think I am being too harsh leaving off programs like Oregon, Nebraska, Auburn, Wisconsin, Clemson, etc., but I would argue those schools aren't inherently above us ... they have just been better. I choose to imagine an Illinois after 3-4 more years of Bielema that we have not been able to imagine since the late 1980s ... and it's not really unrealistic anymore. Illinois scored just as good of ratings as Nebraska or Wisconsin in certain slots last year. Auburn will always be little brother in a small state. Oregon seems reliant on Nike funding that might not last forever. Wisconsin is literally just a version of us that had better coaches for a while. Clemson is riding an absolutely unprecedented dynastic ride, and nobody would have seen them as some type of coup 20 years ago. Etc., etc., etc.
Don't get me wrong, I think we would have a lot of competition for those next spots, but so would everybody else. We have new facilities that are comparable with the TRULY elite programs. We have one of the largest alumni bases in the country and a as-of-yet still untapped MASSIVE instate population with no real instate threat for fans ala something like Oklahoma/Oklahoma State.
Last edited:
Joel Goodson
- ties will be resolved
my money's* on this:
10 conference games sooner than later.
* - $2, FWIW
10 conference games sooner than later.
* - $2, FWIW
- Status