No. We will be better off as a 3rd or even 4th conf at the big boy table. Better to have one or two teams each year making big time money in the big games vs. 5 teams playing against Wyoming or Colorado f***** state.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Not so sure about that, once they start negotiating for 2026 and beyond they will be negotiating from a position of power. There honestly wouldn't be anything stopping them from saying so long to the CFP and instituting a two-league playoff. Likely? Probably not. But they know they're holding the cards.
But a Big2 alienates a large % of college football fans. The networks need viewership, so unless the Big2 expands to 48ish teams- I think there will be a Power 3/4.
I am skeptical a 48 team Power2 would be accretive to the current 34 Big10/SEC teams. So does that mean the top 24-30 brands become a Power 1?
Like I said, it probably wouldn't happen. But the SEC and B1G know they wield a lot more power and influence than the other conferences and I highly doubt they're going to allow the 2026>>> CFP negotiations go down without asserting that influence and getting the terms they want.
All this means we gotta be the hanger-ons. Sometimes we’re the 6 (+2 for personality) but occasionally we’ve got lighting in a bottle and we’re a 9 or 10. If there’s a 12 team playoff that is spinning off 10s of millions per school and we’re not part of that…..we’re stupid
But what terms do they want that uniquely benefit the Big10 & SEC?
Do no auto qualifiers? Does a 5/7 or 4/8 structure?
Also not sure Big10/SEC will be in complete lock-step. The SEC likes an 8 game conference schedule to inflate their conferences overall SOS. Or at least wants ESPN to pay a premium for 9 SEC games. The Big10 could push a 9 game conference schedule requirement to be CFP eligible.
Plus we haven't even considered how united will Big10/SEC be within each conference if student-athletes become employees that can collectively bargain.
And this is exhibit A as to what is wrong with the sport. Seriously “throwing weight around to get what they want” is insane when you really think about it. Yes it’s true but that’s exactly what’s wrong with the direction of this sport. No other college or even pro sport is like this (that I can think of).
My true hope is karma comes and people stop watching college football at some point. Yes I know it will never not be watched entirely. But I hope they start losing a few million viewers over the next several years just to toss it back in the faces of these power brokers that have turned this sport upside down.
I could see the SEC/B1G having a problem with giving the same CFP accommodations to a diluted PAC champion as their conference champions. That's just one. Obviously they're opposing power conferences but it's not like they aren't going to understand what they stand to gain by working together. It's like in the movie Rounders when all the NYC card players are in Atlantic City hustling the tourists, the line "We're not playing together, but then again we're not playing against each other either. It's like the nature channel, you don't see piranhas eating each other."
Thought about it even more. We did realignment and will consider future realignment so we can get the money. No way we want to be apart of some joke with Fresno state and wazzou at campus sites for 20 % of the money. We are apart of the big boys!
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
Between that and the media providers thinking there’s an endless growing stream of ever-increasing funds coming from, you guess it, TV viewers.
The projections of higher media rights deals with super conferences are predicated on individual viewers - like us - shelling out more and more in streaming subscription fees. In the old days, broadcast rights were paid fully by advertising, and available over the air on ABC or CBS. Those funds have just about been maximized (witness the endless breaks in action on the field while the guy with the orange sleeve stands there). Next up, direct-from-the-consumer subscription fees.
We already pay extra to providers for them to pay ESPN, and a lesser amount for FS1 or CBS Sports Network. Plenty of other games are on ESPN+ (subscription fee required). Now this season games are on Peacock (subscription fee required). Many advocating for increased payouts to schools are expecting Amazon Prime (subscription fee required) or Apple (subscription fee required) to step up. Those millions of dollars the athletic departments see dancing before their eyes are coming right out of our wallets.
There’s definitely a point where what the providers expect to earn from subscriptions will outpace the willingness of viewers to pay. Are we nearing that point? I’m not sure - it kinda feels like it, but the appetite for sports is pretty large. But, if viewers are presented with the demand of “pay up if you want to watch the Big 36 play any of their games,” I think a lot of college football fans will pass, wanting to see games of their teams and the teams they compete against, not the ‘Mini NFL.’ Eventually we will get to the over leveraged subscription point, and the whole economic system of ever-growing billions in TV money flowing to athletic departments will falter.
The Big2 still need to schedule teams from the other conferences. If they tried a power play and broke off, those other conferences could prevent their members from scheduling them. And that’s in all sports, not just football.
Great point. There will surely be jockeying for who gets selected how, but the way the money is divided is just as important.
B1G/SEC will want it to be almost entirely on a per-team selected basis so they get ~1/3rd each. G5, ACC will want a bigger share on a per conference basis and less on a per-team selected basis. I ran numbers kind of to both extremes --
for the per-team heavy it is as much as 300% more for the P2 vs the others ($600M vs $200M)
for the more conference based it is more like 20% more ($380M vs $320M)
That's a great point. The SEC would be happy to pay guys, as winning is about everything there. But there are a lot more academic types and traditionalists in the B1G. Very different values at a fundamental level.
The Big12 is probably in the middle - don't have the highest-level academics of the B1G, but I think there is less "win at all costs" than the SEC.
If there was ever some grand bargain to re-organize the entire sport better around geography, rivalry, etc... the B1G would be the ones to lead it.
Oomph… 800k. I hate to think where ISU would be if OUT left for the PAC12 in the first realignment crisis.
Guess OreSt & WashSt are sick thinking about that sliding door.
Guess OreSt & WashSt are sick thinking about that sliding door.
Exactly, they will want it to be 12 at large selections and the money generated from the games goes mainly to the conferences that participated in those games. So if a conference only has one team or didn’t make the playoff at all why should they get a cut of the money?
I’m sure they are looking at the current top 12 teams in the AP top 25 and thinking that’s about what the playoff should look like.
But as everyone here has been saying, will the rest of the country watch or care if they don’t have a seat at the table? I kind of doubt it. But so far the people in charge haven’t seemed to care.
Last edited:
The big 12 should do what's in the best interest of the big 12. Screw the sec and BIG. Yes, the big 12 champion gets an auto bid. And I think there should be a limit on the number of teams a conference can get into the playoff. like 4/12 tops.
if the big and sec dont like it, they can leave the ncaa and compete with the NFL for viewers while millions of fans watch the big 12 etc.
they dont have the votes to force their own way, and i think it is financial suicide for them to form some king of super league that millions wont watch.
if the sec and BIG broke away, id watch big 12 and NFL. wouldnt care about sec and big games as those would have no effect on the teams i follow.
if the big and sec dont like it, they can leave the ncaa and compete with the NFL for viewers while millions of fans watch the big 12 etc.
they dont have the votes to force their own way, and i think it is financial suicide for them to form some king of super league that millions wont watch.
if the sec and BIG broke away, id watch big 12 and NFL. wouldnt care about sec and big games as those would have no effect on the teams i follow.
I like a cap of 3 out of 12 per conference. This is different than the NCAA basketball tourny. The 4th best team, or worse, in any conference doesn't deserve to play for a football national championship. I really don't think the 3rd place team deserves to either, but I'll throw them a bone due to the larger conferences being created.
The trouble is that it probably isn't financial suicide for them. I think Fox & ESPN would be happy to pay up for the big brands in a premier league.
Now long term, maybe it isn't sustainable due to alienating a ton of viewers. But it still might be sufficiently profitable even at a lower base of viewers, with less mouths to feed.
Posted it before, I'll post it again.
In a 12 team playoff, they will change it so that in most years they get the outcome TV wants... which is:
3 SEC
3 Big 10
ND
1 or 2 ACC
1 Big 12
1 G 5 (keep some viewership interest throughout the year)
1 or 2 others (could include a 4th SEC and or big 10)
This is why OuT (mostly OU) aren't scared of SEC losses, and has been coming the whole time. Big12 and ACC won't have much say.
In a 12 team playoff, they will change it so that in most years they get the outcome TV wants... which is:
3 SEC
3 Big 10
ND
1 or 2 ACC
1 Big 12
1 G 5 (keep some viewership interest throughout the year)
1 or 2 others (could include a 4th SEC and or big 10)
This is why OuT (mostly OU) aren't scared of SEC losses, and has been coming the whole time. Big12 and ACC won't have much say.
My guess is the Big10 and SEC are arguing that, based on the media deals they have gotten, the total media value of the CFP playoff is higher with the best overall teams rather than on autobids. Whoever buys the rights to the playoffs in 2026 and beyond will pay more for the best teams overall and that means we can distribute more overall (every conference will get a baseline to get everyone to agree and then more based on appearances).
While it would maximize profits now, I think that would end up declining interest in CFB overall. As more and more schools get left out, less interest overall will mean less eyeballs which will mean less revenue for media deals in the future.
If I'm ESPN, I'd get be begging them to include more and more autobids for more conferences. The best case for them isn't more interest in the SEC, its more interest in the AAC and MACtion. A rising tide raises all ships. Yeah, they might make less now but it sets up for a better stabile future.
It's why horror movies are always going to be made. Spend $1mil on a movie, make $10mil opening weekend, sell it to a streamer and boom easy money. Which you can then spend on your bigger movies to chase the bigger profits. (Ok this analogy isn't perfect since we haven't seen a Dial of Destiny type flop in the CFB media deal yet but it's coming)
While it would maximize profits now, I think that would end up declining interest in CFB overall. As more and more schools get left out, less interest overall will mean less eyeballs which will mean less revenue for media deals in the future.
If I'm ESPN, I'd get be begging them to include more and more autobids for more conferences. The best case for them isn't more interest in the SEC, its more interest in the AAC and MACtion. A rising tide raises all ships. Yeah, they might make less now but it sets up for a better stabile future.
It's why horror movies are always going to be made. Spend $1mil on a movie, make $10mil opening weekend, sell it to a streamer and boom easy money. Which you can then spend on your bigger movies to chase the bigger profits. (Ok this analogy isn't perfect since we haven't seen a Dial of Destiny type flop in the CFB media deal yet but it's coming)
