clt asks how this promotion/ relegation would be determined?
just fb or overall athletics
Everybody wants to date the hot cheerleaders, not everybody gets to.
Sorry, thatâs just the reality of the situation. Not everybody is at the top of the food chain
3 Likes
Thatâs a good question, and I would start it with football, or both revenue sports and see how popular it is.
That would be the odd dynamic is having sports playing in totally different levels. Id def do football and basketball and baseball would be a good idea.
The challenge is how do you do a national title tournament then? So maybe it only works in football??
That sounds awfully like being subservient to the P2 overlords. Know your role! Sound familiar?
And thatâs exactly why Iâve been saying it will be more than 30. At only 30 is looking at it with green tinted glasses in my opinion.
Doing relegation in different sports defeats the idea of regional rivalries. It should be across the board, something like the directors cup.
Maybe - I think the money will dictate what it will end up being. If its all about maximizing the revenue the club is going to be small. They arent going to include schools that arent bringing ratings that make bank.
IMO it comes down to
AD budgets - Shows they have resources (Need to be at least 100Mil top 50 budget are there or higher)
TV Ratings - Drive conf TV ratings (At least a 2.0 in Nielson rating games and having at least 5 of them, top 32 are over 2.0)
Corp Backers - Drives advertising, not sure but I am sure there could be a corp $ base level
NIL - Big pot to compete, especially when brought in house
I dont know where the break point will be, but my gut says it will be small group 30/32/34ish. If you arent high in those four things you arenât getting included.
I hear ya. But as Iâve continually said, theyâre currently splitting the pot with 130 schools in football and 300+ in basketball. Theyâre going to be significantly increasing their revenue with whatever number they settle on. By not limiting it to only 30 schools, theyâre going to be increasing their odds of not having a lawsuit, government interaction, not pissing everyone off, etc.
But they arent really. It isnât like they are splitting things evenly, especially in football.
The courts have repeatedly sided against structure and the NCAA. And they arent going to care about pissing everyone off as they have ignored fans and education through all of this.
The only way it stays big is if someone steps up on the college side and manages to get them all on the same page with an eye towards the product as a whole and some level of parity and real rev sharing. No one has shown that level of care - each school has thus far only cared about themselves. Or the govt steps in and tried to pass something, but itâs likely too late for significant govt involvement.
If its 80-100 some schools it defeats the purpose of the break. If itâs 30-40 they maximize their revenue and we have a solid group of others to make the case as actual college sports. If its 40-80 that spells doom for us - as we likely miss the breakaway that we cant compete with anyway, but are stuck with castoffs no one cares about and iced out of the national conversation.
2 Likes
Sometimes the truth hurts
2 Likes
Youâre contradicting yourself. On the one hand youâre saying they want to get to 30 to maximize revenue. On the other hand youâre saying theyâre already not splitting the revenue.
TCU was just in the football playoffs 2 seasons ago. Cincinnati was in it the season before that I believe. Thatâs not even counting all of the bowl games. Going forward the playoffs will have the potential of having a couple of G5 schools included. That doesnât even consider the ACC, where Pitt and WF recently played for the championship, or March Madness.
I donât think anyone thinks it will stay big or be in the 80-100 range Itâs clear itâs downsizing. The only question is to what size. I agree that based on recent history, it seems unlikely for government to step in. However, I do think that the more schools that are left out the more likely there will be a chance of government or lawsuits to step in. In other words, thereâs a higher chance of a lawsuit if Rutgers and App St are left out than there is if only App St is left out.
Swaim as a source⌠Iâd like to see it confirmed somewhere else.
1 Like
LOL the CFP will not have more than the one G5 team they are obligated to have - I will be absolutely shocked if that ever happens. They continue to try to manipulate March Madness to reduce the number of G5 teams and discounting autobids by putting some in playin games to knock each other out. The bowl games arent even either as routinely G5 bowls cost the school money vs the bigger bowls with the big brands get the big pay day. Has a G5 team crashed that party? Sure, but it isnât common and when it does happen the SEC and B10 complain. And with the portal and NIL the chances for those things to happen get even slimmer.
I said they arent splitting things evenly. Are they sharing some? Yes. It is peanuts though. There is no significant revenue sharing going on past the conference media deals. Now that is where the big brands can maximize revenue. By dropping brands that arenât tracking in the big categories I mentioned they insure everyone that is taking a cut is contributing as well. Itâs just trimming dead weight. GT is not a significant source of ratings or income for the ACC - which is why the conference looked at shifting things so that schools like Clemson took a bigger chunk. That doesnât work long term as we see that deal didnt keep Texas in the B12.
Look at the CFP pay out where B10 and SEC get about 30% of the cash each. The AAC is going to get 10%.
If every school is a big brand it makes every game a big game - at least for awhile. Pooling them all together should be a ratings juggernaut initially. And the amount of money a network(s) would pay for that will be stupid. I donât think in the end it will work but for the first 7-10 years or so I think it probably does well before cracks show.
So now they would have stopped having to share any money with smaller brands AND they have dropped dead weight with a insane media deal and sponsorships. As we have both mentioned the sticking point is where is the break point - 30? 40? 50? The smaller the group the better for us as it keeps some of the names that will generate interest. I think 30 is the small end and 40 is the top. No matter where the break is there will be some pissed off programs who THINK they belong at the top, but their data says different.
1 Like
I agree the odds are low. But theyâre 100% higher than the odds if youâre in a different division, unable to compete.
Youâre contradicting yourself again. On the one hand youâre saying itâs peanuts they arenât worried about. But on the other theyâre constantly changing the rules because they are worried about it.
Under the current format itâs actually gotten better for football, as far as getting into the playoffs. They have to select the 5 highest conference champions. The PAC is gone. The ACC is in turmoil. Do I think if 2 G5 schools are part of the 5 they quickly change the rules again? Most likely.
Riddle me this. If everything is as obvious as you make it out to be and if the networks are truly controlling everything, why in the world would the SEC not immediately snatch up FSU? Why does the CFP committee have athletic directors from NCSU, Kansas State and Miami (OH)? Why was Stanford originally left out in the cold? Why even play this game of leaving conferences and joining another conference?
I do agree odds are better in current climate. No disagreement there. Not sure it matters since we cant compete at that level now. The power players in the P4 would prefer to not give the G5 anything though.
Because rarely does this business go right to where things are going to land. It is always small steps. Plus they have tv network deals, conference buyouts, individual schools own their own rights - its way more complicated than say the NFL just negotiating.
The B10 and the SEC have been having meetings by themselves. They know where this end so do the TV partners. Its just a process to get there.
The want to maximize revenue not because they are worried about, they want to maximize revenue because that is what business do. If they have to give the AAC 10% right now to keep moving the ball they will, but ultimately they dont think the AAC belongs on the same field as they do and would prefer not to give us anything. Which is what is playing out with March Madness.
It will be interesting to watch when the B10 and SEC decide to drop some schools and how that plays out legally or if they have to leave and build something all new. That might also help dictate the size of the break. We havent seen conferences boot a school out yet. Probably have to wait and do that during a tv negotiation.
There is a very small path that leads to us coming out of this looking good IMO - I think the most likely scenario is we get crapped on.
All I know is we cant compete on the national stage and all the changes make that even more difficult than it has been.
1 Like
1 Like