Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[CascadeClone]

Sorry if posted

It's just a bit much that he is blaming the useless NCAA for "allowing" the PAC to get blown up, and blaming TV money for it, when his very own B1G conference is literally both willing accomplice and the weapon being used to kill the victim. That's some chutzpah to blame the NCAA.

Then he mostly pushes for revenue sharing with the athletes, which would benefit the B1G and the SEC more than anyone else, since they have the most money to share. I actually don't hate revenue sharing for athletes, but his rant is hardly altruistic and benevolent.

 

[Klubber]

The more I read about this Crow guy the more I dislike him and embarrassed that he has ISU connections. Not only did he get his BA from ISU he taught there for three years. Sounds to me like he owes a lot to ISU so not sure why he's bashing on coming to the Big XII. Must have been some bad dorm or frat hazing? Reading his bio you'd think he was a smart guy but sounds more like a pompous smart ass. He's self-credited for creating the 'New American University' which looks to me like just basically lowering/changing admission standards to increase enrollment. Also claims to be a 'knowledge enterprise architect' and 'science and technology policy scholar'. Evidently these are real things but researching this gives you a headache trying to figure out what they actually are; but he's not an architect and he's not a scientist either. Probably threw the javalin like a girl.

Science and technology policy scholar?

Someone might want to look into rescinding that since the guy didn't even realize streaming sports was a thing until the Apple TV/PAC deal negotiations.

 

[Cyched]

I would doubt T2 and T3 get into the "big boy" playoffs. Each would have their own probably. It would look a lot like UK Soccer with a Premier League, then EFL Champ, EFL 1, EFL2, etc. Just without relegation.

The top 20 are pretty easy, as you say:
OSU,MICH,BAMA,ND,LSU,GA,PSU,TEX,AUB,OK,FLA,CLEM,TAMU,TENN,FSU,USC,WASH,ORE,UCLA,MIA

(Note that all but 4 of these are now consolidated into the B1G and SEC - what a coincidence!)

I think 20 is actually about the right number for media slots and they would stop right there, rather than pull in more. There's only 7 or 8 really prime timeslots on the networks as it is. So 10 games a week (8 or 9 with byes) might be exactly what they want. Plus look at the potential next 4 teams listed below and tell me they belong with the above - not really.

If they did go to 24 or more, then probably it would come down to brand, population/tv market, recent performance, and maybe geography. Those are super-arguable. The next 15 to pick from are probably:
Wisky, Neb, MSU, Arkansas, VT, Iowa, Utah/BYU, Ole Miss, SCar, Texas Tech, Ok St, UNC, Mizzou, Minny.
Hard to pick the best 4 or 8 from that list - not a lot of big differentiators. Another reason I think they'd stop at 20.

All that said... if they took those 20 teams out, and left the other 50ish plus the G5s to be just "college football" again - I would love that league and would happily follow it and not the Premier.

A semi-pro league with none of the parity safeguards the NFL has.

It's foolproof

 

[ARCYCLONE]

Science and technology policy scholar?

Someone might want to look into rescinding that since the guy didn't even realize streaming sports was a thing until the Apple TV/PAC deal negotiations.

Nothing to rescind, he just calls himself that. ASU has replaced Texas in my mind as most hated team in the conference and they're not even in the conference yet. TH is off the hook. If there's not a "Crow Sucks" or "F*ck Crow" chant when we play them, I'll be highly disappointed.

 

[Cyched]

They have to try to swing a merger with the Mountain West under the PAC name to try to preserve their playoff spot? That's the only thing I can imagine.

Still trying to figure out what this league would look like.

Cal
Stan
OSU
Wazzu
SDSU
SMU
UNLV
CSU
Nevada?
Fresno?
Boise?
New Mexico?

 

[Cyclonepride]

Still trying to figure out what this league would look like.

Cal
Stan
OSU
Wazzu
SDSU
SMU
UNLV
CSU
Nevada?
Fresno?
Boise?
New Mexico?

 

[helechopper]

Sorry if posted

Insufferable. My God.

 

[houjix]

Still trying to figure out what this league would look like.

Cal
Stan
OSU
Wazzu
SDSU
SMU
UNLV
CSU
Nevada?
Fresno?
Boise?
New Mexico?

Looks a bit like later era old-Big East with a weaker BB history.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

I would doubt T2 and T3 get into the "big boy" playoffs. Each would have their own probably. It would look a lot like UK Soccer with a Premier League, then EFL Champ, EFL 1, EFL2, etc. Just without relegation.

The top 20 are pretty easy, as you say:
OSU,MICH,BAMA,ND,LSU,GA,PSU,TEX,AUB,OK,FLA,CLEM,TAMU,TENN,FSU,USC,WASH,ORE,UCLA,MIA

(Note that all but 4 of these are now consolidated into the B1G and SEC - what a coincidence!)

I think 20 is actually about the right number for media slots and they would stop right there, rather than pull in more. There's only 7 or 8 really prime timeslots on the networks as it is. So 10 games a week (8 or 9 with byes) might be exactly what they want. Plus look at the potential next 4 teams listed below and tell me they belong with the above - not really.

If they did go to 24 or more, then probably it would come down to brand, population/tv market, recent performance, and maybe geography. Those are super-arguable. The next 15 to pick from are probably:
Wisky, Neb, MSU, Arkansas, VT, Iowa, Utah/BYU, Ole Miss, SCar, Texas Tech, Ok St, UNC, Mizzou, Minny.
Hard to pick the best 4 or 8 from that list - not a lot of big differentiators. Another reason I think they'd stop at 20.

All that said... if they took those 20 teams out, and left the other 50ish plus the G5s to be just "college football" again - I would love that league and would happily follow it and not the Premier.

I would strongly push back on the idea that the “easy” top 20 includes Miami and Auburn. Probably not UCLA either.

 

[cyclonemagic]

Stanford and Cal are wondering how they got mixed up with this group of low IQ schools.

 

[AuH2O]

Maybe my tin foil hat is on, but this feels like beginning of the narrative that some of these conferences should shed dead weight. It’s a power play to highlight that all are not created equal, and some members might actually be dragging down the reputation/prestige/profitability/whatever of the conference.

We can all point and laugh at Rutgers for sucking. They’ve not made the most of their investment. There’s plenty of other Realignment immigrants that have underachieved relative to their resources: Texas A&M, Mizzou, Colorado, NEBRASKA. Others like TCU and Utah have overachieved.

I guess my point is with Stew’s piece is that the media starts tossing nuggets like this out and the freeloaders in each conference might start looking over their shoulder. It’s messy to kick out a team, but unequal revenue is the next frontier. When companies need to boost profits, they often make cuts when revenue is expected to stay the same or fall. Why would conferences be any different?

I actually think it's a guy who has been wrong at every turn being wrong about something yet again.

The Big 10s intent with adding Rutgers was never a doubt. It was solely about jamming BTN carriage fees in-market in the NYC metro. You bring Rutgers in at a greatly reduced share for a LONG time. Yes, that model is dying, but they are still collecting these fees. Even if Rutgers has now flipped to a net loss financially moving forward (NYC carriage fees for BTN less payout to Rutgers), the other schools had a decade of pulling in NYC carriage fees and turning around and giving Rutgers a tiny cut.

Everyone figured the Rutgers carriage fees approach had a shelf life. The hopes by the Big 10 were by the time the model had flipped to where you need viewers, they'd have made enough money by that point that it was going to still have been well worth it. I think there was SOME hope, at least outwardly that Rutgers would improve with the Big 10 brand, but I don't know that anybody truly thought this would happen or even cared that much.

I think it's still going to be many years before the Rutgers add truly flips to a net negative financially for the other members of the league. By the time it does, there probably will be such a shakeup in college sports that it will become moot. At the very least, by the time that happens all the decision makers will have been long retired.

 

[cyclonemagic]

You can actually download high-resolution pictures of him from his bio website and also his Curriculum Vitae (updated monthly no less)! So on top of everything else, he's a narcissist!

https://president.asu.edu/the-president/biography

Professor Crow probably resents that ISU has not dedicated a statue of his likeness on campus or named a building after him commemorating his time at ISU.

 

[Cyched]

Professor Crow probably resents that ISU has not dedicated a statue of his likeness on campus or named a building after him commemorating his time at ISU.

I'm thinking a statue that commemorates the flocks of crows that **** everywhere.

 

[LonelyCyKC]

Hummm.....

Conference Numbers 2024:
Big 10 -- 18
Big 12 -- 16
SEC ----- 16
ACC ----- 15 (football excludes Notre Dame)
Mountain West -- 11 +2 affiliated
PAC 10 - 4 (2024)

FYI: Football attendance leaders Pac 12:
1. USC (to Big 10)
2. Washington (to Big 10)
3. Oregon (to Big 10)
4. Utah (to Big 12)
5. Arizona (to Big 12)
6. Arizona State (to Big 12)
7. Colorado (to Big 12)
8. UCLA (to Big 10)
9. Cal
10. Stanford
11. Oregon State
12. Washington State

Big 10 took 1, 2, 3, and 8. Big 12 took 4, 5, 6, and 7. No one wants 9-12, although it is warm in California in December.

The Big 10 would make this easier if they took Oregon State and Washington State along with Oregon and Washington, as the two California Schools would be a better fit with the Big 12.

Or we can hold on and wait to pick over the ACC for Louisville, Florida State, etc. (We need a traveling partner for CF).


Go Clones
Go Chiefs

 

[cyclones500]

Seems reasonable. Similar to what @Cyched posted just prior to that.

If Stanford wants to go independent and jettison all those low-life schools, no surprise. Grab SMU instead.

At this point, I'm not sure if Cal-Berkeley cares enough either way. If Cal sez no, get Rice.

 

[mj4cy]

Insufferable. My God.

What was said? I don't have Twitter.

 

[Cyclonepride]

What was said? I don't have Twitter.

Michigan board member trying to blame the NCAA (to deflect from blame for the Big Ten, where it would correctly be placed) for realignment.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

Maybe my tin foil hat is on, but this feels like beginning of the narrative that some of these conferences should shed dead weight. It’s a power play to highlight that all are not created equal, and some members might actually be dragging down the reputation/prestige/profitability/whatever of the conference.

We can all point and laugh at Rutgers for sucking. They’ve not made the most of their investment. There’s plenty of other Realignment immigrants that have underachieved relative to their resources: Texas A&M, Mizzou, Colorado, NEBRASKA. Others like TCU and Utah have overachieved.

I guess my point is with Stew’s piece is that the media starts tossing nuggets like this out and the freeloaders in each conference might start looking over their shoulder. It’s messy to kick out a team, but unequal revenue is the next frontier. When companies need to boost profits, they often make cuts when revenue is expected to stay the same or fall. Why would conferences be any different?

100%. There is no better fan base with better expertise in realignment than Big 12 fans, especially potential left-behinds ISU and KSU.

I thought it would be 15 years or so before teams like Purdue, Minnesota, Mississippi State, etc. would feel realignments wrath, but that timeline has moved up with the OU/WA move.

FYI to those afterthoughts in B10/SEC, you are not safe. Don’t get comfortable

 

[KnappShack]

Insufferable. My God.

It's easier for Michigan athletes to travel to London vs Seattle.

**** Oregon and Washington for their successful overrun of B1G wishes to become conference members

 

[loyalson4evatru]

I would doubt T2 and T3 get into the "big boy" playoffs. Each would have their own probably. It would look a lot like UK Soccer with a Premier League, then EFL Champ, EFL 1, EFL2, etc. Just without relegation.

The top 20 are pretty easy, as you say:
OSU,MICH,BAMA,ND,LSU,GA,PSU,TEX,AUB,OK,FLA,CLEM,TAMU,TENN,FSU,USC,WASH,ORE,UCLA,MIA

(Note that all but 4 of these are now consolidated into the B1G and SEC - what a coincidence!)

I think 20 is actually about the right number for media slots and they would stop right there, rather than pull in more. There's only 7 or 8 really prime timeslots on the networks as it is. So 10 games a week (8 or 9 with byes) might be exactly what they want. Plus look at the potential next 4 teams listed below and tell me they belong with the above - not really.

If they did go to 24 or more, then probably it would come down to brand, population/tv market, recent performance, and maybe geography. Those are super-arguable. The next 15 to pick from are probably:
Wisky, Neb, MSU, Arkansas, VT, Iowa, Utah/BYU, Ole Miss, SCar, Texas Tech, Ok St, UNC, Mizzou, Minny.
Hard to pick the best 4 or 8 from that list - not a lot of big differentiators. Another reason I think they'd stop at 20.

All that said... if they took those 20 teams out, and left the other 50ish plus the G5s to be just "college football" again - I would love that league and would happily follow it and not the Premier.

i don't think the national championship gets limited to only 20 teams being eligible. those next 15 teams you listed won't have any chance at a NC? i can't see that. IMO my idea makes a lot more sense. give the top schools more slots. but there's no way 50 P5 schools aren't included at all in a playoff.

and i still think 25 is a good number for that top tier. if you breakdown how it'd actually be ranked with attendance/revenue/success all weighted out i think a few more SEC schools easily get in there and probably Nebraska and Okie St.