10-17-2024, 07:42 AM
...will Stanford be in it? And what happens to football at the "other" schools?
Discuss.
Discuss.
Life is too short to waste on crap football.
When the "The Super Conference" arrives...
Life is too short to waste on crap football.
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia...ipo=images]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2F9AUI1HHGTnz7a%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=34d86a6316a331bdb39ceda6dd1b04a8107d17174899a3eb7634022c2c172112&ipo=images)
10-17-2024, 08:47 AM
Which sports are included?
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
Which sports are included?
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
Thoughts on the Super Conference:
1. Current league commissioners will hate it.
2. Complete decimation of historic leagues.
3. Deterioriation of historic rivalries as demand increases for "super matchups."
4. Fewer upsets as teams will schedule games against roster equivalents.
5. Dissatisfaction among fan bases as teams that were formerly 10-2 on a regular basis are now 6-6.
6. Will fundamentally replace the NCAA.
7. Will involve between 40 and 70 schools. if it's 40, Wake Forest is in, but Stanford and Cal will be out -- same with UCLA and Nebraska. If it's 70, Stanford and Cal are in. If it's 40, it's a true haves vs. have nots, and only the recent top performers will be invited. The most interesting element is that if there is a 40 team super league, then there will be a mid-tier league involving schools not quite strong enough for the Top 40...UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Nebraska, Vandy,
8. There will be a way for the other 64 schools to compete their way to the top. Will be very difficult, 1-4 schools will break through each year.
9. Will that result in an American college football form of relegation? Maybe.
10. Entrance standards will go completely out the window.
11. Academic standards will be greatly reduced and may, at some point, be eliminated altogether as the teams become fully professional. No matter what, less time in the classroom. There will be a future class-action lawsuit as the 95% of NIL-paid “student”-athletes who don’t make it to the NFL sue, claiming (a) that they didn’t have sufficient time to study and had to spend too much time preparing for a career that never materialized. They were misled, you see.
12. Fifth year of eligibility will be added, as will sixth year to complete the five years.
13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements.
14. Universities will participate in the deals and profits, top universities will get more.
15. Future litigation (NIL, CTE, other health, antitrust) is going to be lucrative for the law firms and will have a major effect on the business rules and structures of the new conference. One or more conferences might go bankrupt because of the litigation.
16. Schools will directly pay players.
17. There will be a robust playoff, likely eight to sixteen teams.
18. There will be regional divisions to maintain rivalries, so USC and UCLA will be back.
19. I don't think the SEC and Big Ten leadership really want a super league. Right now, they're the two super leagues. Why give up all that power? A super league might demand top quality opponents every week and an alarming lack of body bag games. The SEC and Big Ten might combine to form their own Super Conference. Why share with a bunch of undeserving teams?
20. Move to a 14 game regular season schedule.
21. New Super League conference motto: “Greed is Good.”
22. brobdingnagian injection of money from private capital, ostensibly chasing more viewers.
23. A facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race that dwarfs the current facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race.
24. Congress will intervene to regulate.
HAVES:
![[Image: Power-12-Conference-3.jpg]](https://static01.nyt.com/athletic/uploads/wp/2024/10/17011607/Power-12-Conference-3.jpg)
HAVE NOTS:
![[Image: Untitled-design-5.jpg]](https://static01.nyt.com/athletic/uploads/wp/2024/10/17011036/Untitled-design-5.jpg)
1. Current league commissioners will hate it.
2. Complete decimation of historic leagues.
3. Deterioriation of historic rivalries as demand increases for "super matchups."
4. Fewer upsets as teams will schedule games against roster equivalents.
5. Dissatisfaction among fan bases as teams that were formerly 10-2 on a regular basis are now 6-6.
6. Will fundamentally replace the NCAA.
7. Will involve between 40 and 70 schools. if it's 40, Wake Forest is in, but Stanford and Cal will be out -- same with UCLA and Nebraska. If it's 70, Stanford and Cal are in. If it's 40, it's a true haves vs. have nots, and only the recent top performers will be invited. The most interesting element is that if there is a 40 team super league, then there will be a mid-tier league involving schools not quite strong enough for the Top 40...UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Nebraska, Vandy,
8. There will be a way for the other 64 schools to compete their way to the top. Will be very difficult, 1-4 schools will break through each year.
9. Will that result in an American college football form of relegation? Maybe.
10. Entrance standards will go completely out the window.
11. Academic standards will be greatly reduced and may, at some point, be eliminated altogether as the teams become fully professional. No matter what, less time in the classroom. There will be a future class-action lawsuit as the 95% of NIL-paid “student”-athletes who don’t make it to the NFL sue, claiming (a) that they didn’t have sufficient time to study and had to spend too much time preparing for a career that never materialized. They were misled, you see.
12. Fifth year of eligibility will be added, as will sixth year to complete the five years.
13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements.
14. Universities will participate in the deals and profits, top universities will get more.
15. Future litigation (NIL, CTE, other health, antitrust) is going to be lucrative for the law firms and will have a major effect on the business rules and structures of the new conference. One or more conferences might go bankrupt because of the litigation.
16. Schools will directly pay players.
17. There will be a robust playoff, likely eight to sixteen teams.
18. There will be regional divisions to maintain rivalries, so USC and UCLA will be back.
19. I don't think the SEC and Big Ten leadership really want a super league. Right now, they're the two super leagues. Why give up all that power? A super league might demand top quality opponents every week and an alarming lack of body bag games. The SEC and Big Ten might combine to form their own Super Conference. Why share with a bunch of undeserving teams?
20. Move to a 14 game regular season schedule.
21. New Super League conference motto: “Greed is Good.”
22. brobdingnagian injection of money from private capital, ostensibly chasing more viewers.
23. A facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race that dwarfs the current facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race.
24. Congress will intervene to regulate.
HAVES:
HAVE NOTS:
Audaces fortuna iuvat
Thoughts on the Super Conference:
1. Current league commissioners will hate it.
2. Complete decimation of historic leagues.
3. Deterioriation of historic rivalries as demand increases for "super matchups."
4. Fewer upsets as teams will schedule games against roster equivalents.
5. Dissatisfaction among fan bases as teams that were formerly 10-2 on a regular basis are now 6-6.
6. Will fundamentally replace the NCAA.
7. Will involve between 40 and 70 schools. if it's 40, Wake Forest is in, but Stanford and Cal will be out -- same with UCLA and Nebraska. If it's 70, Stanford and Cal are in. If it's 40, it's a true haves vs. have nots, and only the recent top performers will be invited. The most interesting element is that if there is a 40 team super league, then there will be a mid-tier league involving schools not quite strong enough for the Top 40...UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Nebraska, Vandy,
8. There will be a way for the other 64 schools to compete their way to the top. Will be very difficult, 1-4 schools will break through each year.
9. Will that result in an American college football form of relegation? Maybe.
10. Entrance standards will go completely out the window.
11. Academic standards will be greatly reduced and may, at some point, be eliminated altogether as the teams become fully professional. No matter what, less time in the classroom. There will be a future class-action lawsuit as the 95% of NIL-paid “student”-athletes who don’t make it to the NFL sue, claiming (a) that they didn’t have sufficient time to study and had to spend too much time preparing for a career that never materialized. They were misled, you see.
12. Fifth year of eligibility will be added, as will sixth year to complete the five years.
13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements.
14. Universities will participate in the deals and profits, top universities will get more.
15. Future litigation (NIL, CTE, other health, antitrust) is going to be lucrative for the law firms and will have a major effect on the business rules and structures of the new conference. One or more conferences might go bankrupt because of the litigation.
16. Schools will directly pay players.
17. There will be a robust playoff, likely eight to sixteen teams.
18. There will be regional divisions to maintain rivalries, so USC and UCLA will be back.
19. I don't think the SEC and Big Ten leadership really want a super league. Right now, they're the two super leagues. Why give up all that power? A super league might demand top quality opponents every week and an alarming lack of body bag games. The SEC and Big Ten might combine to form their own Super Conference. Why share with a bunch of undeserving teams?
20. Move to a 14 game regular season schedule.
21. New Super League conference motto: “Greed is Good.”
22. brobdingnagian injection of money from private capital, ostensibly chasing more viewers.
23. A facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race that dwarfs the current facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race.
24. Congress will intervene to regulate.
HAVES:
HAVE NOTS:
1. Current league commissioners will hate it.
2. Complete decimation of historic leagues.
3. Deterioriation of historic rivalries as demand increases for "super matchups."
4. Fewer upsets as teams will schedule games against roster equivalents.
5. Dissatisfaction among fan bases as teams that were formerly 10-2 on a regular basis are now 6-6.
6. Will fundamentally replace the NCAA.
7. Will involve between 40 and 70 schools. if it's 40, Wake Forest is in, but Stanford and Cal will be out -- same with UCLA and Nebraska. If it's 70, Stanford and Cal are in. If it's 40, it's a true haves vs. have nots, and only the recent top performers will be invited. The most interesting element is that if there is a 40 team super league, then there will be a mid-tier league involving schools not quite strong enough for the Top 40...UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Nebraska, Vandy,
8. There will be a way for the other 64 schools to compete their way to the top. Will be very difficult, 1-4 schools will break through each year.
9. Will that result in an American college football form of relegation? Maybe.
10. Entrance standards will go completely out the window.
11. Academic standards will be greatly reduced and may, at some point, be eliminated altogether as the teams become fully professional. No matter what, less time in the classroom. There will be a future class-action lawsuit as the 95% of NIL-paid “student”-athletes who don’t make it to the NFL sue, claiming (a) that they didn’t have sufficient time to study and had to spend too much time preparing for a career that never materialized. They were misled, you see.
12. Fifth year of eligibility will be added, as will sixth year to complete the five years.
13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements.
14. Universities will participate in the deals and profits, top universities will get more.
15. Future litigation (NIL, CTE, other health, antitrust) is going to be lucrative for the law firms and will have a major effect on the business rules and structures of the new conference. One or more conferences might go bankrupt because of the litigation.
16. Schools will directly pay players.
17. There will be a robust playoff, likely eight to sixteen teams.
18. There will be regional divisions to maintain rivalries, so USC and UCLA will be back.
19. I don't think the SEC and Big Ten leadership really want a super league. Right now, they're the two super leagues. Why give up all that power? A super league might demand top quality opponents every week and an alarming lack of body bag games. The SEC and Big Ten might combine to form their own Super Conference. Why share with a bunch of undeserving teams?
20. Move to a 14 game regular season schedule.
21. New Super League conference motto: “Greed is Good.”
22. brobdingnagian injection of money from private capital, ostensibly chasing more viewers.
23. A facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race that dwarfs the current facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race.
24. Congress will intervene to regulate.
HAVES:
HAVE NOTS:
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(10-17-2024, 09:36 AM)Mick Wrote: Thoughts on the Super Conference:
1. Current league commissioners will hate it. They created the problem.
2. Complete decimation of historic leagues. That has essentially already happened with all of the conference realignments.
3. Deterioriation of historic rivalries as demand increases for "super matchups." Actually, compared to the current state of conferences, it might increase games between historic rivals.
4. Fewer upsets as teams will schedule games against roster equivalents. But, the closer the teams are in talent the more exciting the games. The upsets can happen in the playoffs.
5. Dissatisfaction among fan bases as teams that were formerly 10-2 on a regular basis are now 6-6. Maybe some dissatisfaction from the fans of the few football factory schools, but more happiness for the fans of many more teams that will win more games than they have historically.
6. Will fundamentally replace the NCAA. Good riddance.
7. Will involve between 40 and 70 schools. if it's 40, Wake Forest is in, but Stanford and Cal will be out -- same with UCLA and Nebraska. If it's 70, Stanford and Cal are in. If it's 40, it's a true haves vs. have nots, and only the recent top performers will be invited. The most interesting element is that if there is a 40 team super league, then there will be a mid-tier league involving schools not quite strong enough for the Top 40...UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Nebraska, Vandy. If it's a better system, let the chips fall where they may. Stanford isn't doing so great under current conditions and we are a West Coast school in the Atlantic Ocean Conference.
8. There will be a way for the other 64 schools to compete their way to the top. Will be very difficult, 1-4 schools will break through each year. Perfect
9. Will that result in an American college football form of relegation? Maybe. So what?
10. Entrance standards will go completely out the window. Admission standards? Why?
11. Academic standards will be greatly reduced and may, at some point, be eliminated altogether as the teams become fully professional. No matter what, less time in the classroom. There will be a future class-action lawsuit as the 95% of NIL-paid “student”-athletes who don’t make it to the NFL sue, claiming (a) that they didn’t have sufficient time to study and had to spend too much time preparing for a career that never materialized. They were misled, you see. Nah.
12. Fifth year of eligibility will be added, as will sixth year to complete the five years. Why?
13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements. The media companies would love this move.
14. Universities will participate in the deals and profits, top universities will get more. Isn't that how it works now, basically?
15. Future litigation (NIL, CTE, other health, antitrust) is going to be lucrative for the law firms and will have a major effect on the business rules and structures of the new conference. One or more conferences might go bankrupt because of the litigation. Maybe settling on a well thought out system rather than the wild west of NIL and transfer portal activities we have now will avoid some of the litigation that is sure to come under the current system.
16. Schools will directly pay players. Why wouldn't that be better than the current system? The NIL farce is causing big issues with fairness and parity.
17. There will be a robust playoff, likely eight to sixteen teams. Good
18. There will be regional divisions to maintain rivalries, so USC and UCLA will be back. Good
19. I don't think the SEC and Big Ten leadership really want a super league. Right now, they're the two super leagues. Why give up all that power? A super league might demand top quality opponents every week and an alarming lack of body bag games. The SEC and Big Ten might combine to form their own Super Conference. Why share with a bunch of undeserving teams? I'll bet Saban and Sweeney would support it. Besides, with any change in a system the ones at the top will resist. They've already got it good, so why change. This ignores the big picture.
20. Move to a 14 game regular season schedule. Why? With more teams make the playoffs there will be more games to play post season.
21. New Super League conference motto: “Greed is Good.” Greed is running the system now.
22. of immense proportions injection of money from private capital, ostensibly chasing more viewers. Good
23. A facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race that dwarfs the current facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race. Good
24. Congress will intervene to regulate. Good, we need it. The NCAA has sh*t the bed.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
(10-17-2024, 09:36 AM)Mick Wrote: Thoughts on the Super Conference:
1. Current league commissioners will hate it. They created the problem.
2. Complete decimation of historic leagues. That has essentially already happened with all of the conference realignments.
3. Deterioriation of historic rivalries as demand increases for "super matchups." Actually, compared to the current state of conferences, it might increase games between historic rivals.
4. Fewer upsets as teams will schedule games against roster equivalents. But, the closer the teams are in talent the more exciting the games. The upsets can happen in the playoffs.
5. Dissatisfaction among fan bases as teams that were formerly 10-2 on a regular basis are now 6-6. Maybe some dissatisfaction from the fans of the few football factory schools, but more happiness for the fans of many more teams that will win more games than they have historically.
6. Will fundamentally replace the NCAA. Good riddance.
7. Will involve between 40 and 70 schools. if it's 40, Wake Forest is in, but Stanford and Cal will be out -- same with UCLA and Nebraska. If it's 70, Stanford and Cal are in. If it's 40, it's a true haves vs. have nots, and only the recent top performers will be invited. The most interesting element is that if there is a 40 team super league, then there will be a mid-tier league involving schools not quite strong enough for the Top 40...UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Nebraska, Vandy. If it's a better system, let the chips fall where they may. Stanford isn't doing so great under current conditions and we are a West Coast school in the Atlantic Ocean Conference.
8. There will be a way for the other 64 schools to compete their way to the top. Will be very difficult, 1-4 schools will break through each year. Perfect
9. Will that result in an American college football form of relegation? Maybe. So what?
10. Entrance standards will go completely out the window. Admission standards? Why?
11. Academic standards will be greatly reduced and may, at some point, be eliminated altogether as the teams become fully professional. No matter what, less time in the classroom. There will be a future class-action lawsuit as the 95% of NIL-paid “student”-athletes who don’t make it to the NFL sue, claiming (a) that they didn’t have sufficient time to study and had to spend too much time preparing for a career that never materialized. They were misled, you see. Nah.
12. Fifth year of eligibility will be added, as will sixth year to complete the five years. Why?
13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements. The media companies would love this move.
14. Universities will participate in the deals and profits, top universities will get more. Isn't that how it works now, basically?
15. Future litigation (NIL, CTE, other health, antitrust) is going to be lucrative for the law firms and will have a major effect on the business rules and structures of the new conference. One or more conferences might go bankrupt because of the litigation. Maybe settling on a well thought out system rather than the wild west of NIL and transfer portal activities we have now will avoid some of the litigation that is sure to come under the current system.
16. Schools will directly pay players. Why wouldn't that be better than the current system? The NIL farce is causing big issues with fairness and parity.
17. There will be a robust playoff, likely eight to sixteen teams. Good
18. There will be regional divisions to maintain rivalries, so USC and UCLA will be back. Good
19. I don't think the SEC and Big Ten leadership really want a super league. Right now, they're the two super leagues. Why give up all that power? A super league might demand top quality opponents every week and an alarming lack of body bag games. The SEC and Big Ten might combine to form their own Super Conference. Why share with a bunch of undeserving teams? I'll bet Saban and Sweeney would support it. Besides, with any change in a system the ones at the top will resist. They've already got it good, so why change. This ignores the big picture.
20. Move to a 14 game regular season schedule. Why? With more teams make the playoffs there will be more games to play post season.
21. New Super League conference motto: “Greed is Good.” Greed is running the system now.
22. of immense proportions injection of money from private capital, ostensibly chasing more viewers. Good
23. A facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race that dwarfs the current facilities/nutrition/coaching/fitness arms race. Good
24. Congress will intervene to regulate. Good, we need it. The NCAA has sh*t the bed.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
10-17-2024, 12:00 PM
(10-17-2024, 11:30 AM)martyup Wrote: 13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements. The media companies would love this move.
Marty, help me understand this one. Right now, ESPN and Fox control college football along with the Big 10 and SEC conferences. They have great product, great distribution and are looking at a profitable, healthy business for the next 8-10 years. A super conference would absolutely need ESPN and Fox to be key participants. But what will it offer them that they don't have now?
The super conference proposals that I have seen add more money to the pot from outside investors, mainly private equity. But that would dilute ESPN and Fox's control. So I am interested to hear your thoughts (or those of anyone else who wants to chime in) on why ESPN and Fox should be interested in the super conference.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
(10-17-2024, 11:30 AM)martyup Wrote: 13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements. The media companies would love this move.
Marty, help me understand this one. Right now, ESPN and Fox control college football along with the Big 10 and SEC conferences. They have great product, great distribution and are looking at a profitable, healthy business for the next 8-10 years. A super conference would absolutely need ESPN and Fox to be key participants. But what will it offer them that they don't have now?
The super conference proposals that I have seen add more money to the pot from outside investors, mainly private equity. But that would dilute ESPN and Fox's control. So I am interested to hear your thoughts (or those of anyone else who wants to chime in) on why ESPN and Fox should be interested in the super conference.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
10-17-2024, 04:23 PM
(10-17-2024, 11:58 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(10-17-2024, 09:56 AM)M T Wrote: It seems that there is only one sport that you even think of.I'm struggling today, and not following your point. Is that a royal "you" or directed towards my earlier question?
The post just before mine only considered football and spoke of destruction of historic leagues. Perhaps I should have said “the preceding post” rather than “you”.
Just prior to that post, you (cardcrimson) asked about other sports. It seems to me that this super conference excludes any other sport or gender. At least, the thoughts presented did not include consideration of the majority of college athletes.
(10-17-2024, 11:58 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(10-17-2024, 09:56 AM)M T Wrote: It seems that there is only one sport that you even think of.I'm struggling today, and not following your point. Is that a royal "you" or directed towards my earlier question?
The post just before mine only considered football and spoke of destruction of historic leagues. Perhaps I should have said “the preceding post” rather than “you”.
Just prior to that post, you (cardcrimson) asked about other sports. It seems to me that this super conference excludes any other sport or gender. At least, the thoughts presented did not include consideration of the majority of college athletes.
(10-17-2024, 04:23 PM)M T Wrote:(10-17-2024, 11:58 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(10-17-2024, 09:56 AM)M T Wrote: It seems that there is only one sport that you even think of.I'm struggling today, and not following your point. Is that a royal "you" or directed towards my earlier question?
The post just before mine only considered football and spoke of destruction of historic leagues. Perhaps I should have said “the preceding post” rather than “you”.
Just prior to that post, you (cardcrimson) asked about other sports. It seems to me that this super conference excludes any other sport or gender. At least, the thoughts presented did not include consideration of the majority of college athletes.
Heaven help us if Congress gets involved. At least one member of congress thinks the weather is controlled by government.
Not intended as a dig directed at Roscoe or any of our stalwart members of the Bar, but I do not see how this situation can continue without more and more legal actions. Suits for Breach of Contract when NIL payments don't measure up to the promised levels. Suites launched because the school that offered the largest NIL won't let the player in the door for some reason. Maybe we finally all just admit the obvious, that being that for most schools academic standards for athletes are far different that those for other students. So Stanford signs up to be the 49's farm team. Only by accident would any player be a real Stanford Student, they would just be guys who couldn't make the final roster. This allows the pro teams to have much larger rosters, enough to staff the real 49'rs and then to staff the Stanford Cardinal Farm Team. The coaches of course would be paid for by the 'Niner's, Stanford would provide the Stadium and other athletic facilities needed. In return Stanford gets a cut of the gate and TV package. This provides some sort of return on the various assets like the Stadium, weight room etc. I do think you need to make ticket prices low, and cost of a TV package fairly low.
As far as I am concerned, we either go all in on something like this, or downsize football to D2 or D3. If we are really going to compete in football, we need a level playing field and at the moment the field is tilted about 45 degrees against us.
At this moment I think we can still compete in this mess in other sports and at least have a decent chance of being competitive, even basketball.
(10-17-2024, 04:23 PM)M T Wrote:(10-17-2024, 11:58 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(10-17-2024, 09:56 AM)M T Wrote: It seems that there is only one sport that you even think of.I'm struggling today, and not following your point. Is that a royal "you" or directed towards my earlier question?
The post just before mine only considered football and spoke of destruction of historic leagues. Perhaps I should have said “the preceding post” rather than “you”.
Just prior to that post, you (cardcrimson) asked about other sports. It seems to me that this super conference excludes any other sport or gender. At least, the thoughts presented did not include consideration of the majority of college athletes.
Heaven help us if Congress gets involved. At least one member of congress thinks the weather is controlled by government.
Not intended as a dig directed at Roscoe or any of our stalwart members of the Bar, but I do not see how this situation can continue without more and more legal actions. Suits for Breach of Contract when NIL payments don't measure up to the promised levels. Suites launched because the school that offered the largest NIL won't let the player in the door for some reason. Maybe we finally all just admit the obvious, that being that for most schools academic standards for athletes are far different that those for other students. So Stanford signs up to be the 49's farm team. Only by accident would any player be a real Stanford Student, they would just be guys who couldn't make the final roster. This allows the pro teams to have much larger rosters, enough to staff the real 49'rs and then to staff the Stanford Cardinal Farm Team. The coaches of course would be paid for by the 'Niner's, Stanford would provide the Stadium and other athletic facilities needed. In return Stanford gets a cut of the gate and TV package. This provides some sort of return on the various assets like the Stadium, weight room etc. I do think you need to make ticket prices low, and cost of a TV package fairly low.
As far as I am concerned, we either go all in on something like this, or downsize football to D2 or D3. If we are really going to compete in football, we need a level playing field and at the moment the field is tilted about 45 degrees against us.
At this moment I think we can still compete in this mess in other sports and at least have a decent chance of being competitive, even basketball.
10-17-2024, 08:32 PM
(10-17-2024, 05:36 PM)GK3 Wrote: As far as I am concerned, we either go all in on something like this, or downsize football to D2 or D3. If we are really going to compete in football, we need a level playing field and at the moment the field is tilted about 45 degrees against us.
At this moment I think we can still compete in this mess in other sports and at least have a decent chance of being competitive, even basketball.
The future landscape may not involve the NCAA and its rules, at least when it comes to football. But at the moment isn't it a rule that a school can't play football at the D2 or D3 level when the rest of its athletics department plays in D1? Isn't that the rule that forced UCSB to give up football way back when?
I suppose that's actually what the Pioneer football league is for. A nominally single sport D1 football league that chooses to be non-scholarship, effectively allowing D1 schools to play D3 football.
Travel doesn't get any easier compared to the ACC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_Football_League
(10-17-2024, 05:36 PM)GK3 Wrote: As far as I am concerned, we either go all in on something like this, or downsize football to D2 or D3. If we are really going to compete in football, we need a level playing field and at the moment the field is tilted about 45 degrees against us.
At this moment I think we can still compete in this mess in other sports and at least have a decent chance of being competitive, even basketball.
The future landscape may not involve the NCAA and its rules, at least when it comes to football. But at the moment isn't it a rule that a school can't play football at the D2 or D3 level when the rest of its athletics department plays in D1? Isn't that the rule that forced UCSB to give up football way back when?
I suppose that's actually what the Pioneer football league is for. A nominally single sport D1 football league that chooses to be non-scholarship, effectively allowing D1 schools to play D3 football.
Travel doesn't get any easier compared to the ACC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_Football_League
10-17-2024, 08:36 PM
(10-17-2024, 12:00 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-17-2024, 11:30 AM)martyup Wrote: 13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements. The media companies would love this move.
Marty, help me understand this one. Right now, ESPN and Fox control college football along with the Big 10 and SEC conferences. They have great product, great distribution and are looking at a profitable, healthy business for the next 8-10 years. A super conference would absolutely need ESPN and Fox to be key participants. But what will it offer them that they don't have now?
The super conference proposals that I have seen add more money to the pot from outside investors, mainly private equity. But that would dilute ESPN and Fox's control. So I am interested to hear your thoughts (or those of anyone else who wants to chime in) on why ESPN and Fox should be interested in the super conference.
Anything that adds excitement and has the potential to bring new TV viewers would be welcomed by the media companies. Obviously contracts would need to be renegotiated, but greed will always win out and I think ESPN and Fox will end up making more money with a more structured college athletic competition system. I'm not just considering football. I think there is media money on the table for sports like volleyball, womens' basketball, baseball, softball, tennis, and wrestling. The media rights for these sports have been historically undervalued, but are rising in popularity.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
(10-17-2024, 12:00 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(10-17-2024, 11:30 AM)martyup Wrote: 13. I don't know that there's all that much more untapped money in the TV market. ESPN/ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have deals with the conferences, including the Big Ten’s deal (through 2029-30), the Big 12’s deal (through 2030-31), SEC’s exclusive deal with ESPN runs through 2033-34), ACC deal is through 2036. Superconference deal will start between 2030 and 2036, depending on conference arrangements. The media companies would love this move.
Marty, help me understand this one. Right now, ESPN and Fox control college football along with the Big 10 and SEC conferences. They have great product, great distribution and are looking at a profitable, healthy business for the next 8-10 years. A super conference would absolutely need ESPN and Fox to be key participants. But what will it offer them that they don't have now?
The super conference proposals that I have seen add more money to the pot from outside investors, mainly private equity. But that would dilute ESPN and Fox's control. So I am interested to hear your thoughts (or those of anyone else who wants to chime in) on why ESPN and Fox should be interested in the super conference.
Anything that adds excitement and has the potential to bring new TV viewers would be welcomed by the media companies. Obviously contracts would need to be renegotiated, but greed will always win out and I think ESPN and Fox will end up making more money with a more structured college athletic competition system. I'm not just considering football. I think there is media money on the table for sports like volleyball, womens' basketball, baseball, softball, tennis, and wrestling. The media rights for these sports have been historically undervalued, but are rising in popularity.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
10-18-2024, 07:21 AM
(10-17-2024, 08:36 PM)martyup Wrote: Anything that adds excitement and has the potential to bring new TV viewers would be welcomed by the media companies. Obviously contracts would need to be renegotiated, but greed will always win out and I think ESPN and Fox will end up making more money with a more structured college athletic competition system. I'm not just considering football. I think there is media money on the table for sports like volleyball, womens' basketball, baseball, softball, tennis, and wrestling. The media rights for these sports have been historically undervalued, but are rising in popularity.Whether or not a super conference would in reality "add excitement" or "has the potential to bring new TV viewers" isn't important. It is only important that the "media" believes it will :-) or that living with it is better than fighting it and losing. The real tragedy is that a immense amount of money is programmed based on hypothesis that can't really be tested. You can't compare the results of changing the conference system and maintaining the current system and chose the one that performs the "best". Even the definition of "best" is heavily dependent on where your organization sits in the food chain.
A "very sub-optimal" choice only can be detected after it is implemented. At that point college sports may be effectively "gone" and "going back" would be impossible. Yes, you can kill the goose that laid the golden egg. The media companies will then move on to what they think "the next big thing" may be. The economics of the situation do not lend themselves to consideration of the sustainability or stability of the "solution" the media prefers. They provide the money, and if they make a short-term decision that has horrible long term consequences it doesn't matter. Those involved will have received the bonuses and been promoted long before that happens.
(10-17-2024, 08:36 PM)martyup Wrote: Anything that adds excitement and has the potential to bring new TV viewers would be welcomed by the media companies. Obviously contracts would need to be renegotiated, but greed will always win out and I think ESPN and Fox will end up making more money with a more structured college athletic competition system. I'm not just considering football. I think there is media money on the table for sports like volleyball, womens' basketball, baseball, softball, tennis, and wrestling. The media rights for these sports have been historically undervalued, but are rising in popularity.Whether or not a super conference would in reality "add excitement" or "has the potential to bring new TV viewers" isn't important. It is only important that the "media" believes it will :-) or that living with it is better than fighting it and losing. The real tragedy is that a immense amount of money is programmed based on hypothesis that can't really be tested. You can't compare the results of changing the conference system and maintaining the current system and chose the one that performs the "best". Even the definition of "best" is heavily dependent on where your organization sits in the food chain.
A "very sub-optimal" choice only can be detected after it is implemented. At that point college sports may be effectively "gone" and "going back" would be impossible. Yes, you can kill the goose that laid the golden egg. The media companies will then move on to what they think "the next big thing" may be. The economics of the situation do not lend themselves to consideration of the sustainability or stability of the "solution" the media prefers. They provide the money, and if they make a short-term decision that has horrible long term consequences it doesn't matter. Those involved will have received the bonuses and been promoted long before that happens.
10-18-2024, 11:03 AM
I have been reading more about the 2 proposals currently made public. Both of them would involve the FBS schools banding together under an umbrella anti-trust exemption to negotiate media rights as a single entity instead of conference-by-conference which is what happens today. In the current environment, ESPN and Fox have leverage over the conferences. But if the conferences come together, they would have leverage over ESPN, Fox, CBS, NBC, Amazon, Apple, etc. Basically, they could put their significant potential audience up for bid just as the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL do.
In this scenario, support from ESPN and Fox would not be needed to make the super conference work. In fact, they would oppose it because it might cost them more money and potentially take away lucrative content.
Note that for this to work, the super conference will need a Congressional anti-trust exemption. I think this makes it more likely that Stanford would be included. In fact, all of FBS should be included in the proposal, the Power 4 and the Gang of 5. Let's say you want elected representatives from Ohio to support the anti-trust exemption. They might say, "To get our vote, you have to take Akron, Ohio U and Miami as well as Ohio State." California's representatives and senators would say, "If you want to include USC and UCLA, you have to take Stanford and Cal too (as well as Sac State, Fresno State, San Jose State, etc.)."
In this scenario, support from ESPN and Fox would not be needed to make the super conference work. In fact, they would oppose it because it might cost them more money and potentially take away lucrative content.
Note that for this to work, the super conference will need a Congressional anti-trust exemption. I think this makes it more likely that Stanford would be included. In fact, all of FBS should be included in the proposal, the Power 4 and the Gang of 5. Let's say you want elected representatives from Ohio to support the anti-trust exemption. They might say, "To get our vote, you have to take Akron, Ohio U and Miami as well as Ohio State." California's representatives and senators would say, "If you want to include USC and UCLA, you have to take Stanford and Cal too (as well as Sac State, Fresno State, San Jose State, etc.)."
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
I have been reading more about the 2 proposals currently made public. Both of them would involve the FBS schools banding together under an umbrella anti-trust exemption to negotiate media rights as a single entity instead of conference-by-conference which is what happens today. In the current environment, ESPN and Fox have leverage over the conferences. But if the conferences come together, they would have leverage over ESPN, Fox, CBS, NBC, Amazon, Apple, etc. Basically, they could put their significant potential audience up for bid just as the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL do.
In this scenario, support from ESPN and Fox would not be needed to make the super conference work. In fact, they would oppose it because it might cost them more money and potentially take away lucrative content.
Note that for this to work, the super conference will need a Congressional anti-trust exemption. I think this makes it more likely that Stanford would be included. In fact, all of FBS should be included in the proposal, the Power 4 and the Gang of 5. Let's say you want elected representatives from Ohio to support the anti-trust exemption. They might say, "To get our vote, you have to take Akron, Ohio U and Miami as well as Ohio State." California's representatives and senators would say, "If you want to include USC and UCLA, you have to take Stanford and Cal too (as well as Sac State, Fresno State, San Jose State, etc.)."
In this scenario, support from ESPN and Fox would not be needed to make the super conference work. In fact, they would oppose it because it might cost them more money and potentially take away lucrative content.
Note that for this to work, the super conference will need a Congressional anti-trust exemption. I think this makes it more likely that Stanford would be included. In fact, all of FBS should be included in the proposal, the Power 4 and the Gang of 5. Let's say you want elected representatives from Ohio to support the anti-trust exemption. They might say, "To get our vote, you have to take Akron, Ohio U and Miami as well as Ohio State." California's representatives and senators would say, "If you want to include USC and UCLA, you have to take Stanford and Cal too (as well as Sac State, Fresno State, San Jose State, etc.)."
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
10-18-2024, 11:40 AM
College presidents of the "blue bloods" will approve a superleague if -- and only if -- the payouts to their schools double overnight.
Otherwise, they'll happily drool over rising revenue charts (like this one: https://nvgt.com/blog/power-5-conference...estimates/ ) and pay guys like SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey and the B1G commissioner to tell them they are the smart ones ("I have yet to see a single thing in any plan that contains things that we couldn't do ourselves and do with our A4 colleagues").
After all, the college presidents will tell themselves, we're not greedy or anything.
Otherwise, they'll happily drool over rising revenue charts (like this one: https://nvgt.com/blog/power-5-conference...estimates/ ) and pay guys like SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey and the B1G commissioner to tell them they are the smart ones ("I have yet to see a single thing in any plan that contains things that we couldn't do ourselves and do with our A4 colleagues").
After all, the college presidents will tell themselves, we're not greedy or anything.
College presidents of the "blue bloods" will approve a superleague if -- and only if -- the payouts to their schools double overnight.
Otherwise, they'll happily drool over rising revenue charts (like this one: https://nvgt.com/blog/power-5-conference...estimates/ ) and pay guys like SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey and the B1G commissioner to tell them they are the smart ones ("I have yet to see a single thing in any plan that contains things that we couldn't do ourselves and do with our A4 colleagues").
After all, the college presidents will tell themselves, we're not greedy or anything.
Otherwise, they'll happily drool over rising revenue charts (like this one: https://nvgt.com/blog/power-5-conference...estimates/ ) and pay guys like SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey and the B1G commissioner to tell them they are the smart ones ("I have yet to see a single thing in any plan that contains things that we couldn't do ourselves and do with our A4 colleagues").
After all, the college presidents will tell themselves, we're not greedy or anything.
10-18-2024, 07:01 PM
I remember when many said that D1 college football would never have playoffs. Then I remember when many said that they would never have more than 4 teams in the CFP.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »