Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[2speedy1]

Yeah but if they formed a superconference with nothing but bluebloods eventually there would be a top half and bottom half of that, and the top half would have to decide to carry the bottomfeeders along. If it's purely driven by money, they wouldn't. And the cycle repeats until we end up with a superduperconference of Georgia, Bama, tOSU, and Michigan.

Conferences need cannon fodder. The top programs of the top conferences know this.

If they really believe that, then why arent these conferences adding one "cannon fodder" team for every blue blood? Why did the SEC just add OuT and not pick up said additional cannon fodder teams.

If any of them really believed they need their lesser teams to stay relevant and that they would not be the top of a league full of blue bloods, basically none of the last many realignments would never have happened.

TV people pull the strings and they want as many marque games as possible and will push to make them all that way if possible.

You really think Ohio state believes they need Indiana or Texas believes they need Vandy to win the conference? I guarantee most people in those type of schools believe they will be among the top dogs no matter who is in their conference.

 

[Cyhig]

They generate that because they are both highly ranked and considered for the championship. A 2-2 bama vs a 1-4 Georgia isn’t drawing that

Also not getting that number alienating a bunch of fans whose teams no longer matter

Edit* this is also the second time in a decade these teams are meeting outside a championship or playoff.

I disagree. An Alabama - Georgia matchup would still attract large viewers in your scenario. The same week there also may be a 4-0 Ohio State team facing a 4-0 Texas team that would then take the prime time game.

The Dallas Cowboys always draw large ratings regardless of their record. I know it’s the NFL, but the point is name brand teams will always attract viewership regardless of their record

 

[FriendlySpartan]

If they really believe that, then why arent these conferences adding one "cannon fodder" team for every blue blood? Why did the SEC just add OuT and not pick up said additional cannon fodder teams.

If any of them really believed they need their lesser teams to stay relevant and that they would not be the top of a league full of blue bloods, basically none of the last many realignments would never have happened.

TV people pull the strings and they want as many marque games as possible and will push to make them all that way if possible.

You really think Ohio state believes they need Indiana or Texas believes they need Vandy to win the conference? I guarantee most people in those type of schools believe they will be among the top dogs no matter who is in their conference.

Because they already have the lesser teams built in?

Also you all have this idea of what elite schools mindset is despite no frame of reference. Yeah those top schools like having a break. There was a campaign to get Michigan to nominate Rutgers as a protected rival. Didn’t work obv but yeah people don’t want every week to be a grind.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

I disagree. An Alabama - Georgia matchup would still attract large viewers in your scenario. The same week there also may be a 4-0 Ohio State team facing a 4-0 Texas team that would then take the prime time game.

The Dallas Cowboys always draw large ratings regardless of their record. I know it’s the NFL, but the point is name brand teams will always attract viewership regardless of their record

Can’t compare the NFL. College teams are heavily influenced by their success. I get your point but any comparison to the NFL is just a non starter.

 

[Cyhig]

Can’t compare the NFL. College teams are heavily influenced by their success. I get your point but any comparison to the NFL is just a non starter.

Put the top 24 programs together in one conference and there’s a large likelihood there will be at least one game involving two marquee programs with good/great records each week.

That’s what the networks want

 

[2speedy1]

Because they already have the lesser teams built in?

Also you all have this idea of what elite schools mindset is despite no frame of reference. Yeah those top schools like having a break. There was a campaign to get Michigan to nominate Rutgers as a protected rival. Didn’t work obv but yeah people don’t want every week to be a grind.

So what you are saying what the fans believe or want is different than what the people that actually make the decisions do.

You are basically proving my point. You and the fans believe they need/want the cannon fodder, just like they believe those in control will never want unequal revenue, or a super league etc. But what the people that make the decisions did/do appears to be the opposite.

It seems what you believe is the mindset of said elite schools want is different for you as a fan, than what the people actually making the decisions want.

 

[FinalFourCy]

The premier league has relegation, I also didn’t bring it up but it’s impossible to compare for that reason.

And no when those teams get regular losses in the super league the brand takes a hit and programs fall off. Then you’re just back into a normal league with 3-4 teams regularly being a cut above.

Yes it has relegation but don’t be pedantic. The fact that no premier league team would willingly move down, despite there being greater odds of a losing season, is very much the same dynamic that the top tier league in college football would have.

That’s blatantly wishful thinking. Every top brand already has the risk of losing seasons, and have had lulls. It didn’t impact support. That risk of losing seasons doesn’t materially change with P1, but the P1 brand and spotlight helps offset the impact in such an event. Every analogous setup, no team or franchise would move down in order to have an easier schedule. Then there’s OUT moving to the SEC….there’s no precedent of staying for slightly easier schedules over the allure of more money and prestige

I get it, it’s an uncomfortable thought as a MSU fan, but you’re just coping now.

The bigger question is what entity has the motivation and cash to aggregate the best of the two conferences? There are not many, but if they started with disgruntled P2, it’s possible come 2032

 

[isucy86]

I disagree. An Alabama - Georgia matchup would still attract large viewers in your scenario. The same week there also may be a 4-0 Ohio State team facing a 4-0 Texas team that would then take the prime time game.

The Dallas Cowboys always draw large ratings regardless of their record. I know it’s the NFL, but the point is name brand teams will always attract viewership regardless of their record

The Big10 & SEC play a total of 145 conference games a year. So the TV folks have to see value in an Arkansas vs. So Carolina game as well as Georgia vs Bama.

Contraction ain't happening and a Super League ain't happening. If there is more meat on the Big12 or ACC bone, we see further realignment. It might happen in 2 or 6 years. So we have plenty of time to speculate and comiserate.

 

[FinalFourCy]

Can’t compare the NFL. College teams are heavily influenced by their success. I get your point but any comparison to the NFL is just a non starter.

You have it backwards

Pro sports are highly influenced by success and W/L

College sports are largely captive markets, alumni, in which the consumers are much more inelastic to success. College fans DONATE to pick up production costs…you don’t see that in the NFL, although they do now have seat licensing

 

[Cyhig]

The Big10 & SEC play a total of 145 conference games a year. So the TV folks have to see value in an Arkansas vs. So Carolina game as well as Georgia vs Bama.

Contraction ain't happening and a Super League ain't happening. If there is more meat on the Big12 or ACC bone, we see further realignment. It might happen in 2 or 6 years. So we have plenty of time to speculate and comiserate.

We’re not far away from one super conference. The B1G and SEC are even in discussions of a scheduling partnership at this time.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Put the top 24 programs together in one conference and there’s a large likelihood there will be at least one game involving two marquee programs with good/great records each week.

That’s what the networks want

That’s what they already have

 

[CYDJ]

Have we taken a vote on who will watch these college teams if YOUR team has no connection to them? Exactly what percentage of the sporting population will want to watch 24 teams they have NO affiliation with? I know, I know, they would be the BEST college football teams playing each other. WHO CARES. I'd sooner watch the BEST athletes that are in the Pros and then MY team who is not the pros and the teams they are competing with.

I would NEVER care about or watch the 24 team league, just like I ignore the XFL, or the BFL or whatever other stupid thing is between my team's league and the Pros.

I know I am weird (not just becuase of this point of view, of course) but I only watch other college teams because it has some connection to my team. If I want to watch and support a bunch of coddled millionaires being paid by a bunch of big wig high falutin' aholes sitting in an "owner's box", I've got the Pros for that. Quite Honestly, that arrangement would make me just never watch anything with them in it, EVER.

The question is, exactly how weird am I? I'm going to guess that there are MANY more weirdos like me than there are people who want to root for another "college" like Bama Or Ohio St. to do anything that aren't already affiliated with them.

They've already got the pros for that.

BUT, I'm sure someone out there has the actual stats on this. Let's see them please.

 

[FinalFourCy]

That’s what they already have

Almost have in the SEC.

Add the best of the BIG to that, and it’s easy to see why a P1 has investors intrigued.

And why that has a Spartan fan grasping at fallacies against it

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Almost have in the SEC.

Add the best of the BIG to that, and it’s easy to see why a P1 has investors intrigued.

And why that has a Spartan fan grasping at fallacies against it

Hahaha ok, obv I can’t convince you but appreciate the back and forth

 

[Cyhig]

That’s what they already have

So what’s the marquee matchup this Saturday?

 

[FriendlySpartan]

So what’s the marquee matchup this Saturday?

ISU/Baylor

 

[CysRage]

Hahaha ok, obv I can’t convince you but appreciate the back and forth

Yours and Gonzo's only defense is "the Big Ten has been together for over a hundred years, they would never burn bridges with the other conferences members". Michigan and Ohio State are cut from the same cloth as Texas, Oklahoma, UCLA, USC. They will burn those bridges with Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, and I hate to say it Michigan State if it meant they can take that same pool and re-distribue it to the top of the Big Ten. The networks love the Michigan-Ohio State, Bama-Georgia, etc matchups on Fox, CBS, ABC. Ohio State-Purdue, Michigan-Minnesota, Bama-Vanderbilt televised on Big Ten or SEC Network, not so much. They get more of the matchups they want with a P1 and can pay those schools even more.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Yours and Gonzo's only defense is "the Big Ten has been together for over a hundred years, they would never burn bridges with the other conferences members". Michigan and Ohio State are cut from the same cloth as Texas, Oklahoma, UCLA, USC. They will burn those bridges with Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, and I hate to say it Michigan State if it meant they can take that same pool and re-distribue it to the top of the Big Ten. The networks love the Michigan-Ohio State, Bama-Georgia, etc matchups on Fox, CBS, ABC. Ohio State-Purdue, Michigan-Minnesota, Bama-Vanderbilt televised on Big Ten or SEC Network, not so much. They get more of the matchups they want with a P1 and can pay those schools even more.

Michigan isn’t, Ohio state might be. But again there is zero reason currently or in the near future to cause this.

 

[CyCrazy]

Michigan isn’t, Ohio state might be. But again there is zero reason currently or in the near future to cause this.

I wouldnt be so sure about that. Theire will come a time when the big players dont want to support the lower teams. Not saying its soon but it will happen.

 

[2speedy1]

Michigan isn’t, Ohio state might be. But again there is zero reason currently or in the near future to cause this.

You really think you know what all the people in power at Michigan want. Maybe you work with the AD, or maybe you are the AD, otherwise I dont see how. Because we all know what is said in public and what is said behind closed doors is very different.

There is a reason no one knows what is happening with realignment until someone comes out and makes it public.

We all have our guesses and we all can listen to the media and their speculation and all can believe what we want, but unless you are privy to that inside information directly from the people in the room making the decisions you really have no idea.

What fans want and what the AD wants/does are often times very very different.

Michigan is no different than any other school and really no different than any other blue blood, they want money, and while a few million might not be enough to make them jump, there is a breaking point for even them, and if their peers are all making a move they will be pressured too, for fear of being left out.

I doubt you have as much inside info on Michigan or MichSt as you believe, and I am sure you dont on places like OSU, PennSt, Texas, Alabama etc. And I doubt you have an insider at ESPN or Fox either. I agree you know more about what the yokels and yoopers want there in Michigan, but as you have even said those people are not making the decisions.

In the end we are all just speculating and you are too. That being said most of us here are used to getting kicked in the nuts, so we will always be wearing our cups and hedging our bets when something can change for the worse. Most of us are very skeptical and will always say never say never, because if something can go bad probably will. We have learned to Murphy's Law and expect it.