Wonder if this concept will be brought up again as an appeasement to G5 fans (to avoid anti-trust suits)
FWIW I donât understand the pairings in the promotion / relegation bowls proposed. Seems like the top G5 champ should get the worst P5 school.
Anyway, itâs not about this one specific proposed format, just the promotion / relegation concept in general.
I am at peace with a 30 team break away, what I dont want to see is a 70 team break away that includes App St and ECU in which we are condemned to live enternally with the regret of not starting football sooner
If the bottom line is keeping the money with the teams that bring in the majority of the viewership why does it make sense to bring teams like Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Washington, etcâŚwhy not just create a league that includes the âeliteâ, Notre Dame, Alabama, Ohio St, Michigan, Oklahoma, Texas, USC, etcâŚyou are only sharing money with schools that dont bring in the viewership numbers
How would this work in scheduling, does this new league only play teams within its own breakaway league, if its 30 0r 70 are fanbases on the lower end going to be happy long term going 4-8, 3-9, 5-7 because they are only playing other âeliteâ teams
End it at 30 teams, let them have their thing and group the rest of us geographically and let us get back to COLLEGE football
App State and ECU are not part of the 70. This is a P4 + Notre Dame thing. Perhaps Oregon State and Wazzu get included if it comes to fruition.
@emb49er - youâve got the gist of what several of us (@NinerWupAss and myself included) have been saying for a while now.
- it doesnât make sense to drag along âdead weightâ like Vandy and Northwestern and Wake and Rutgers and whatâs left of the PAC 12 etc. Thatâs why 70 doesnât make sense.
Let me say it where everyone can read it (lol):
THE BOTTOM HALF OF THAT 70 IS A LOT CLOSER TO THE G5 PROGRAMS THAN THEY ARE TO THE TOP HALF OF THAT 70.
- The 70 would not include ECU or App. The only east coast G5 program I saw them grab was Memphis in that one proposal. Chances are every G5 programs save a small handful would get relegated.
But thatâs not okay. As much as folks on here like playing ECU, App and JMU, this only works if we have some of that bottom half of the 70 with us. We need Wake and Va Tech, and Duke, and GA Tech and so on for this to be viable.
This is a proposal, hypothetically if the number is that high and a committee deciedes on which 70 teams make the cut, App St and ECU historically are going to be considered for that list, and we are most definately not
The top 30 are the influencers while the other 40 will do what they are told to survive (probably with a disproportionate revenue sharing plan). On the whole, the âpower conferencesâ look after each other with WSU and OSU being the exception.
App and ECU wonât be considered. This is exclusively P4 + UND.
Apparently Wolken hasnât read the entire article by Dellenger:
Dan is right. The â30â vs â70â factor is the make or break for us, with a relegation / promotion system as a possible mitigant / appeasement.
It does not make sense financially, but maybe their thinking is that if it is only 30 teams, and they only play each other, some fanbases are not going to be happy with mediocre records year after year, they will need a 70 team league to stack wins against the bottom half of the 70
But that is only if the format is that they only play other teams in the break away league, but their are only about 15 schools that bring in 75% of the mainstream viewership, so if greed is the game just take your money and play each other only, and the rest of us will have amatuer college football set up in geographical based conferences
The power schools will never agree to promotion relegation. Never going to happen.
I say letâs get this split off done as soon as possible so we can rid ourselves of our association with this level of greed.
I will happily live with the consequence because frankly Iâm sick of the entire subject.
To the P4 and ND:
Begone I say.
It does seem like the âblue bloodsâ need to bring their punching bags (âdead weightâ) with them so that they all still have a shot at winning records. I think the breakaway league might end up larger (than 30) for this reason. The Harlem Globetrotters need their Washington Generals.
The catch is going down to money. Have those punching bags for wins or go from 70 to 30 some and every school has double the cash.
And Dodd reminds us these most recent proposals are nothing new in college football:
I guess it comes down to how shortsighted they are, or maybe not. Maybe those brands can survive just fine without winning seasons or long stretches of mediocrity among the elite.
It would be like the pros. How are the Panthers doing now that theyâve stunk for a bit (serious question)? Or probably better, the Cleveland Browns or Detroit Lions. Their merch still sold. They still got their TV money. Itâs like the mafia, and theyâre Made Men.
They are going to be crying on top of their giant pile of money with those 4-8 seasons.
Gonna be fun for them!
The question is will they introduce caps or anything that levels the playing field to a degree.
The University of Michigan will NOT play on Friday and will NOT accept any cost caps!!!