Because an entire season's worth of experience, production, learning, leadership, tape, etc. is a million times more meaningful to NFL guys than a CFP game or two.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
What does Caleb Williams really have to prove? Especially against regular season opponents. Not necessarily good teams. CFP playoffs lets me know how he responds to pressure and against quality teams. Playing against inferior teams doesn’t show me much.
Different times. If Caleb Williams would sit, his NIL money from USC stops. If a school like USC is smart, his final NIL payment is after the CFP. With the new NIL pay for play era: no play, no pay.
With that logic, then the experience of playing in high pressure CFP games against elite talent has value.
But you changed the argument!
Don't guys sit for fear of injury? Just as easy to get injured over a 13 game season as 3 playoff games.
Wait OMG, what on earth will UCLA do...LOL. They have all found ways around this stupid law.
At the very least I'd think an entire season for a guy like CW is valuable to NFL scouts to make sure he hasn't regressed, and to solidify himself as the top pick. If he sits the entire season I can't imagine NFL guys looking to favorably on it, and it could open the door for someone else to emerge and take his spot as the top pick.
Yeah but they need the 13-game season to climb or solidify their position as a top pick. They don't need a few games after the regular season to do that.
So playing inferior competition during the season is better than playing under pressure against National Championship teams in the CFP? I disagree.
I guess we'll see. If top picks start foregoing entire seasons we'll know you were right. I don't see it happening because I can't imagine those top guys wanting to take themselves out of the spotlight for their junior or senior season and allow someone else to emerge and position themselves higher.
Have you paid attention to combine season? Players draft stock rises and falls without playing a game. Spend a couple months getting bigger, stronger and faster.
Caleb Williams has plenty of tape for NFL teams. The reality is his upcoming season can only hurt his draft #. Good thing he's a competitor
(and getting paid to play).
Like I said, when we start seeing top picks foregoing entire college seasons (and not just bowl/CFP games), we'll know you were right. I don't see it happening.Have you paid attention to combine season? Players draft stock rises and falls without playing a game. Spend a couple months getting bigger, stronger and faster.
Caleb Williams has plenty of tape for NFL teams. The reality is his upcoming season can only hurt his draft #. Good thing he's a competitor
I never said Academics matter that much....just maybe a little.
Stanford being the #1 academic school, and also the #1 athletics school at least matters "A LITTLE" Especially to the academic types that make the final decisions.
But ultimately the real matter is who the media partners want, or will pay for.
I never said that the PAC 4 were great adds, that we should add them, or that we will add them.
What I said is the value of those schools really is not much different than the value of the bottom 4 of the ACC. And holding on to spots for the bottom of the ACC is not that great of a strategy. As in the end if we end up at 24 teams it wont matter.
I also have repeatedly said that beyond the top few in the ACC, there really is not that much difference in Value. Which means FSU, Clem, UNC etc are not who I am talking about, as the B12 will never have a chance for them. And my point on FSU is that they continue to throw their weight around but have not mattered in over a decade.
You are right FSU has great viewership, but that has declined over the years they have been mediocre.
Everyone says UNC is a huge add that everyone wants... yet their viewership is almost identical to ISU, and about middle of the ACC in that respect. Louisville has almost double the viewership of UNC yet no one says the SEC and B1G are lining up for Louisville.
Point being Viewership is a huge part of this, but there are other aspects that at least play a small part in it.
And by the way Stanfords viewership is above everyone in the new B12 except OkSt. And above every possible add for the B12, from the ACC. They would be 4th in the ACC behind Clem, FSU, and Miami. They are 2nd in the current pac 12 behind USC. So if viewership is all that matters, B10, ACC and B12 would be begging for them to join.
Ja'Marr Chase sat out a year at LSU for the draft and it didn't seem to hurt his stock
Florida State has a fanbase, for starters. If all that is true, then why is Stanford left out while Florida State will have their pick of the BIG or SEC?
The travel is for everything other than football. Basketball is going to have to travel cross country as well as basically everything else.
The ACC, unless something nuts happens, will lose probably 6 teams to the P2. They'll still have 9 teams left in that scenario. They don't have to blow it all up, its not impossible that whatever is left gets a TV deal close to us. Unlikely, but not impossible. Would they rather stay together and offer the eastern teams plus TCU or go for not a huge difference in money but have to fly out west a ton since we'd have 9 teams out that way?
Stanford has all of the intangibles you listed though, and no invite. So what are they missing then in your criteria?
Pretty sure Covid had a lot to do with that.
The Big Easy conference is different from the rest because the conference makes most of its money off raising the rates they can charge for BTN when they have a team in that state. Since the league already has USC and UCLA there would be no increase for adding Stanford.
Now Fox might think they can get more revenue, getting the SF/Oakland market, but no one out there watches the Stanford games the way it is, the viewership is not going to increase now that they are in the Big Easy. Stanford drew good ratings when they had stars and were winning, that has not been the case for over 3 years.
Stanford is never joining the B12, so that point is moot, and you have to ask, "why would the ACC want to create an outlander school on the other side of the country?" Currently when they are struggling with teams wanting to league the league.
This was the point I was making to the post I replied to. They stated that the only thing that mattered was viewership. To which I replied if that was the case Stanford would be a top add, but they are not, so things beyond viewership matter too. Travel is an issue but as we have seen with recent realignment, not as much of an issue as some like to claim.
The numbers for I quoted for Stanford and others was from the last 2 years.
Interesting discussion point. As I understand, Currently…the form of the contract cannot be “pay for play”. Even though in substance we know it all is.
Can you have an NIL contract that requires continued team involvement (I didn’t think so)?
