It's also possible they convince a court that Title 9 is satisfied if they pay out athletes based equal %s of the revenue their sport generates. I see that mentioned a lot, and I think it has some merit.
Williams & Blum: The Florida State / Clemson conversation
- Thread starter ChrisMWilliams
- Start date
They tried that in the late 70s and the courts didn’t buy that then. Maybe things have changed.
That just isn't happening. Today each Big10 & SEC school make over $60M annually from their conference media rights deals. Each G5 school makes maybe $5M. No way 60% gets split evenly.
A top tier of 32-48 schools will keep 100% of conference & playoff money. The next tier will be free to create their own playoff and keep the money it generates.
The argument I've seen that seems to hold the most water revolves around providing equal opportunity. And the "opportunity" could be defined as just the scholarship. Anything earned beyond that is merit based and restricting the players from being paid what they've earned has already been a lightning rod for change.
Ultimately, none of us know. But I'd be SHOCKED if the heavy hitters don't figure out a way to directly turn their financial advantage into a talent advantage wherever possible.
There's a bit of some unequal treatment of sports already based on expenses and other factors already. I'm sure there are some ideas of what might fly in court. Either way, the universities will need to deal with it in some capacity.
Revenues or net gain/loss gets pretty wonky. Revenues only mean flows in, so some sports may lose more money due to higher expenses but have more revenues. If they do it by net gain/loss (i.e. profit), well, they pretty much all lose money other than CFB and MBB. Then you get the legal argument that a football player that never sees the field costs the university a ton of money and really is bringing in no revenue, compared to a star WBB player that provides some value, but simply isn't enough to swing her sport into the black.
I'm not going to pretend to know how this will play out. At this point I kind of am good with whatever happens.
There would not be equal sharing with G5 schools, only amongst the top 70. G5 would have separate playoff and TV deal that would aggregated in some fashion with Top 70 rights.
And by aggregating regular season/CFP TV rights amongst the Top 70 and bidding out NFL style to multiple bidders beyond Fox and ESPN would presumably result in bigger payouts for the likes of Ohio St once you factor in part of the revenue pie being shared unequally based on TV ratings. Existing control of CFB TV rights by ESPN and Fox is solely for their benefit.
Positioning the Big 12 as the cutting edge, fresh, sexy conference is where the opportunity exists to create a competitive advantage over the BIG and SEC. I really think Yormark understands and wants to pursue this direction. The 3rd conference outside the traditional (musty) norm seems to be necessary route to create value. Doing things differently, with a large injection of modernity is how to survive.
My question here is does doing things differently include more Thursday/Friday night games? Positioning weekly showcase games in a different time slot on Saturdays? Everything should be on the table, and the more creative the Big 12 can be presenting the product the better. For example, I do think that a ISU @ WVU Thursday night game would get more eyeballs than that game being another 11 am Saturday morning game engulfed by boring BIG matchups.
My question here is does doing things differently include more Thursday/Friday night games? Positioning weekly showcase games in a different time slot on Saturdays? Everything should be on the table, and the more creative the Big 12 can be presenting the product the better. For example, I do think that a ISU @ WVU Thursday night game would get more eyeballs than that game being another 11 am Saturday morning game engulfed by boring BIG matchups.
At what point does an 18-24 team league break apart? Pulling in too many teams seems without an obnoxiously long grant of rights seems like a bad idea for ISU after about 2035 because you could break apart the big 12 pretty easily at that point.
If it were up to me, the big 12 would have already broken off so that the hateful 8 could grab the 4 corners and dump the other newcomers. Since that didn't happen, I would not have taken Arizona St / Utah since they didn't want to come until their conference completely dissolved.
It's just not good in the long run to add schools who don't want to be here and will leave at their next chance. Unless it's Notre Dame, they'd be worth it with a similar contract they have now with the ACC.
If it were up to me, the big 12 would have already broken off so that the hateful 8 could grab the 4 corners and dump the other newcomers. Since that didn't happen, I would not have taken Arizona St / Utah since they didn't want to come until their conference completely dissolved.
It's just not good in the long run to add schools who don't want to be here and will leave at their next chance. Unless it's Notre Dame, they'd be worth it with a similar contract they have now with the ACC.
Every single school in the Big XII would leave for the SEC or B1G if given the opportunity. Every single one.
Tech believes, and maybe rightly so, they’ll have a seat in the B10 or SEC. So they’re not going to be the first to jump on a life raft.
In this purely hypothetical, it would be a brand that would be welcomed in the B12 that knows it doesn’t have a shot at the P2 like CU or Arizona. I think the options there would be Louisville or Pitt. Maybe Syracuse
fun hypothetical.
If FSU, Clemson, VT, NC State, Pitt, Louisville , Miami, WVU, and kstate broke away and formed a new league, and ISU was invited, would you say aye or nay?
A nay would mean remaining in a 13 team league with cinn. houston, and arz state and baylor. although uconn could be added to get to 14.
If FSU, Clemson, VT, NC State, Pitt, Louisville , Miami, WVU, and kstate broke away and formed a new league, and ISU was invited, would you say aye or nay?
A nay would mean remaining in a 13 team league with cinn. houston, and arz state and baylor. although uconn could be added to get to 14.
I think you have to take that, just from a brand perspective. All of those teams have played in NY6 games over the past 25 years. Some have Heisman winners and finalists.
Get KState out of there and bring KU instead and I’d be a yes.
The next round of realignment won't be a shot in the dark like OuT or USC/UCLA. The posturing is already being done behind the scenes.
Regents, politicians and university leaders will try to package UVA & VT. Same goes for NC schools. It will be a game of chicken- how bad does Big10 or SEC want UNC or UVA?
It could also be a situation where each school has more value individually. Each of the 4 schools getting maximum payout with 2 going to Big10 and 2 to SEC.
VA Tech to the SEC maybe. I don't see them in the Big 10. Virginia, Pitt, UNC, Duke, Georgia Tech, Syracuse and maybe even Miami seem like they would be invited over VA Tech. Just my opinion.
I was 100% on board with those comments until the unequal revenue sharing part. I've always said If you want to be a member of a conference then be a member. Just the fact the Clemson and FSU are leaving because they don't get a bigger piece of the pie makes me not even want to answer their phone call.
