If PCSA does get passed in its current version, the super league breakaway won't be permitted.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
The arms race in the Big 10 continues. While students at University of Washington are getting hosed, the football coach says more more more
sports.yahoo.com
Jedd Fisch continues push for more financial support for Washington
In an interview on The Triple Option podcast, Jedd Fisch discussed Washington's need for increased donor support.
If the PCSA passes, the urgency for breakaway will be ramped up and the moves will be announced before the law can take effect. The power players will do their damnedest beat the posse out of town.
I believe it freezes things along current lines. IE, they could realign, but when the law goes into effect they would have to un-realign.
How does that get enforced though? If 24 schools say they are taking their football (or entire athletics) programs out of the NCAA and organizing under a separate governing entity, what is the mechanism that forces them back into their current structure? This will obviously end up in the courts, but there is not a chance it is settled in a timely manner.
You're seriously suggesting political retribution over college sports from senators and congresspeople that have to get re-elected in the states that this retribution would impact the most?
This is correct. You can't apply a law that wasn't on the books at the time of the movement.
Been through this before, It doesn't matter to senators from Missouri, Washington and other states as well. I get that the Purple Hawks want to see ISU relegated, but this train of thought doesn't work for your agenda.
You can set your watch to the name calling every time you even get slightly challenged on your logic.
I can guarantee that if there is a 24 team super league, lawsuits to test the PCSA will be not be the top billed lawsuit, it will come from teams the Big Ten and SEC teams left out.
That's why the number is 36 and there is going to be one hell of a competition to get one of the last two tickets. Which two ACC schools are willing to take the least to get in under the buzzer?
A couple things regarding pooling:
- It would be optional, not required. My understanding the current PCSA language says pooling is voluntary. So based on everything the Big 10/SEC have said, they have ZERO interest in pooling media rights.
- Even if the Big 10 & SEC would agree to pool rights to maximize revenue for the current 66ish P4 schools (but not maximize Big10/SEC monies). The pooling would not mean equal distribution school to school or conference to conference. The big brands would take a bigger share, after all that is who the TV folks are paying to broadcast. As I alluded to above, there is no reason for Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Purdue, Maryland, Rutgers, UCLA, etc. to agree to pool TV monies. They would be giving up their advantage over Iowa State, K-State, Okie State, Colorado, Arizona State, Louisville, NCST, VT, Syracuse, etc.
Why do you doubt this? I'd think that would be the perfect time for a lame duck member of Congress from SEC/ B1G states to throw caution to the wind in terms of p*ssing off constituents in their state.
IMO that is a bad take. If pooling would be required it doesn't mean equal sharing between teams, even at a conference level.
- The ACC has already gone down the path of saying its elite brands should get more. Miami's CFP money didn't go back to the ACC for equal distribution.
- When the Big 10 was talking Private Equity investment, the payouts by school weren't equal. Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State were going to get like $190M. USC, Oregon were going to get around $145M. And the remaining 13 teams around $110M.
Once the voluntary language is in place and passed, then the ACC & Big 12 lose all leverage. There in no indication that the Big10 & SEC desire to not pool will go away.
Sure FBS pooling optimizes money for all 66 schools. It's pure SOCIALISM! But it doens't optimize money for the 25+ teams in the Big10/SEC who aren't OSU, Mich, PSU, UT, A&M, etc. So the majority of the Big10 & SEC school Presidents are never going to vote for pooling. Why would Purdue, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, etc. give up their $30M/year advantage over Big12 & ACC teams? They wouldn't.
Because there's more money in it for Cruz/Cantwell/etc. to kick the can into 2027. Then Cody Campbell, Private Equity, etc. have to load their lobbyist up with more money for another fight?
Plus I doubt "politicians" want to piss off their consituents. In most cases they are residents and fans of in-state schools. And why is PCSA good for SEC & Big 10 states? Politicians in FL, SC, TX, NC, etc. might like some of the guard rails that PCSA provides. But no way they want to stop their instate schools from joing the Big 10/SEC.
