We’re in a hub and easy to fly in and out. I don’t care to be in a bus league just to be close to schools.
If we’re winning right now, all we’re talking about is moving to AAC and not concerned about CUSA/Sun Bleh stuff consolidation.
2 Likes
So you’re more likely to fly to El Paso for an away game than drive to Conway?
Of course not, but I’m also not looking about where we are, but where we want to go. I have zero interest is staying in a bus league in the minors.
Schedule regionally for your non-conference games.
1 Like
Agree completely.
I think that most logical thing is to realignment geographically for non revenue sports (including P5 schools) and then let football and MBB be figured differently in way that takes TV markets into consideration. Of course, since that is logical, I doubt it will happen.
clt says we continue to build for the sec
If Alston goes through, shit will hit the fan.
I’m curious as to how that ends up for us… but I don’t know how it ends up well.
We are never going to be in the majors. Aac mayyyybe someday, but it isnt thr majors either, though its Clearly a big step up from cusa.
FWIW, AAC is a power conference in hoops.
Never is a long time. ~20 years ago (or less) we shared a conference with Louisville and Va Tech.
AAC power league, lol.
OK, then definitely one of the so-called Major Seven in hoops.
There were people at TCU and Utah and other schools that said this. Is it likely? No. But with the way alignment goes you literally never know. If they all go to super conferences of 16 plus teams I like our chances. If they stay 12 teams we aren’t getting past AAC, if the big leagues implode we could find ourselves in a league with former power league schools. Alignment will never end and there is no telling how it will all play out.
D-II Dixie State - mostly remembered here as the then-JUCO school Vincent Grier transferred to in 2003 before landing at Minnesota - is latest to consider jump to D-I.
Would join as member of WAC, though football would need to find another home or compete as an independent as does fellow in-state school BYU.
I know there are many college AD’s that believe the current model of large conferences is not sustainable. I tend to agree. Money is drying up, especially if pay to play truly takes root. In some isolate instances, boosters and fan bases are very upset they lost main rivals moving to a league just for a modest bump in revenue. It wouldn’t shock me at all to see major league shuffling in the next 10 years. If so, we better be ready.
Furthermore, with football struggling a bit with all the health concerns, if the playoff expands with automatic bids to conference winners, it will hasten the conference realignment even sooner.
I have been an advocate (snort) of the autobid for all conferences model for a while. It wont affect Bama, Clemson and the other elite programs, but the low rung P5s will hate it. However, it would be absolutely fantastic long term for the stability and interest in the game. Think 5-10 years down the road. Here is how it would most likely work:
16 team playoff.
Every Conference champion (CC game) winner gets an auto bid (10)
6 at large bids
Selection/seeding show, just like NCAA Hoops
1st round games played at home of stronger seed. (8 games), OR regional Bowls (eg Belk bowl)
Rotating legacy major bowl alliance Bowls for the remaining rounds (7 games) (eg Rose, etc)
Other legacy bowls would be free to retain conference tie ins for teams that didn’t make playoffs
Optional: reduce regular season to 11 max games. This is to offset the lengthening of the season, and would also require winning (not .500) records to go to any bowl game.
Pros:
Parity - make the game truly competitive and make it a national interest sport instead of the current focus on the SE and upper Midwest. Introduce some actual drama to the season (if I see Kirk Herbstreet breathlessly “release” his preseason CFP picks like there is ANY surprise there one more time, Im gonna barf. “Bama, Clemson, Oklahoma and OSU”? Holy Shit Kirk, you’re a visionary. How do you figure this stuff out? Will you pick some lottery #s for me?
CCG games become defacto 1st round games (round of 32). The raised stakes make these must watch games… which means REVENUE.
Speaking of this, the new model would generate so much more revenue than the current model does = more money for everyone.
Finally, it would give FBS / ESPN meaningful content for all of December. They could even do an opening weekend like NCAA hoops does 8 games spread over 4 days. Primetime Thurs & Fri, and two games Saturday and Sunday OR several other similar models. Get every single game on the air, and on the weekend games, overlap them a little in case one is a dud.
Cons:
Not many. Slightly longer season for about 8 teams. Worthwhile tradeoff.
Those folks that worry about the first round Bama vs 16 seed game, don’t. Remember, even now, that may be Bama against App St, or UAB/UNT, or the MAC winner. That alone is intriguing, but over time, parity will push that gap even closer. such that there will be no sure things. When recruits see that they can go play in any FBS conference and still have a shot (even if they might still have a better shot in the SEC), more kids will opt for non-elite schools and parity will ensue.
One other big optional rule I would introduce to address the paying players issue is revenue sharing.
- I would open up licensing of all the players and teams. One general license fee (access to all teams) and individual team licenses. Money is split 50/50 between the schools and a pool for the players. This includes jerseys, memorabilia, and for you gamers, bring back NCAA football games, this time with full rosters.
The player pool share of the money is split evenly between all FBS players in good standing (this is similar to an apprenticeship wage). I believe this can even stand up to Title IX as it does not limit opportunities for any non revenue sports.
- The other model would be a more basic revenue sharing model. Every FBS school distributes say 2% of top line revenues to a player sharing pool. Otherwise the same. This is top line revenues, which will reduce the efforts to cook the books to cut out the players. I did the math on this once, and it works out to a few grand per season or each player which seems pretty equitable IMHO.
Both of these models would do away with the cost of attendance nonsense, simply because that system is not equitable and is effectively anti-competitive.
1 Like
I agree…I think when this happens, league restructuring will come about as well. Why would Pitt, for example, want to stay in the ACC competing for nothing, when they could form a new league and perhaps, compete for championships and playoff bids?
There’s no real argument against a 16 team FBS playoff except P5’s don’t want G5’s getting access to real money or impressing recruits by beating P5’s. That’s the long and the short of it. Those with power and money don’t want to share even scraps from their plates.
1 Like