Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[FinalFourCy]

The way you would get pooling to happen is by eliminating equal revenue sharing. The big dogs get more money.

At the end of the day, what this would mean is that the actual elites would get more than everyone else, regardless of conference. The schools most adversely affected would be the lower class of the Big 10 and SEC - IE the schools that are basically Big 12 or ACC schools that are historically lucky.

Theoretically you'd have the Big 12 and ACC support this because it stops the elevation of their peer schools by association with the blue bloods, and the blue bloods are on board because they'd make more money. The Big 12 and ACC wouldn't likely make any less, but the gap between them and the artificially propped up schools in the back half of the SEC and Big 10 go away, and I think at the end of the day, that's really what the Big 12 and ACC want to see.

Any realistic person understands that Ohio State, Michigan, Texas, LSU, etc are the economic drivers of the sport and in any capitalist sense have a right to the bigger share of the pie. The pain point is seeing the Purdues, Mizzous, and Marylands of the world being rewarded at the expense of the West Virginia's, Virginia Tech's, and Kansas States of the world.

The schools who would oppose divvying revenue on the basis of actual revenue generation are outnumbered by their Big 12/ACC counterparts, and overruled by their in-conference overlords.

But at this point, no one on the "pro pooling" side of the fence is proposing such a model.

Yes, this is really about ending the subsidies some of P2 are getting via equal revenue sharing. About making non-elites (more) equal


There needs to be a better offer for elites, to bring this change…although arguably OSU types don’t need much more than an alternative concept to leverage in order to get concessions

It could be super pooling. It could be the elites themselves pooling

i don’t think it’s via legislation that also has a lot of other aspects. Including typical pork.

I hope Yormark the Redbird deal is really about getting new investors and entrants, including PE, realizing they can exploit the fact elites are currently underpaid due to aforementioned subsidies. Using a M1 as the vehicle

 

[FinalFourCy]

I legit don't care.

The Plains Midwest type of pod ISU would end up in would likely never field a national champion unless OU was part of it, but the national championship has never been the part of college football I cared about. I care about playing schools in the same part of the country that I've seen ISU play against my whole life that I've developed strong feelings about.

I'm far more interested in games outside this area when it's a regional match up. The idea of Penn State, Pitt, WVU, Maryland, Rutgers, Cuse, etc in the same spot sounds awesome to me.

You’re not the casual viewer.

If it doesn’t appeal to the casual viewer, it doesn’t make sense structurally

Fortunately casual viewers do tend to like context like historical rivalries.

There’s room for preserving some historical associations. But a 9 game conference schedule of regional opponents won’t work, except for the base of the SEC

 

[Al_4_State]

I think this is just such a funny post as most on here have been bemoaning how college sports is now the haves and have nots (P2 vs the rest) and then you have posts like this desiring even more unequal rev share and creating a permanent separation of the top which just takes what’s happening today and makes it so you don’t get an Indiana, or Miami, or others who rise up.

So in reality you don’t want more parity, or any type of balance as people claim you just want more people to be along side you with zero chance to ever compete.

Wild take, I get it, it’s very British of you all but I understand. Just nice to have people say it

What I really actually want is the Top 16-20 schools to separate into a different division and schools 20-80 form their own division with it's own national championship.

Then the remaining G5 and FCS merge into one division with it's own champion.

Other than that, I prefer some version of things not devolving any further. I want my school to play it's historical rivals, and I want other fans by and large to have this same experience. If the current configurations of the SEC and Big 10 fully separate, that basically dies. The thing that seems the most fundamentally unfair in the current landscape is the idea that Purdue and Northwestern are inherently more deserving of high end inclusion than anyone in the Big 12 just because Ohio State and Michigan have been nice to them. I realize that you root for one of those schools that's been artificially propped up and I root for one of those schools who didn't get a free pass to suckle at those teets, and that informs both of our perspectives.

If the brand schools only want to play other brands, just do it, and let everyone else who is about the same do their thing. We're already financially left behind, and you guys are getting big pay checks with low potential for fan reward. In my proposal Michigan State would have a far better shot at mattering than they will in a Big 10/SEC breakaway.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

Rational realignment would have Miami FL and UCF as part of a "Big East" conference. And with an element of unequal revenue sharing, Miami FL would likely make more money than anyone else in that league and be a happy camper.

Miami has been in the ACC 8 years longer than it was in the Big East and UCF was never in the Big East.

Explain how this is 'rational' to anyone but you? This is up there with Northwestern not getting to be in the Big 10 anymore because reasons?

 

[1SEIACLONE]

You seem to think those schools already aren’t. They are, it’s called the BIG and SEC. Thus far those interests align with the elites interests too, and so the conference exists.


In large part because it has been the best option for the elites (due to desires of two networks).

Fundamentally, what the M2 should be trying to do is give the elites a better offer. Single entity pooling does that. Either it ends the P2 as we know it, similar to how better offers ended B12/PAC, or brings unequal revenue sharing to P2



Attempting to use legislation to do this, without making it transparent the benefits to elite, is more likely to galvanize the P2. Or worse, actually force revenue equality on the sport- that’s a huge political misstep. Arguably a shakedown by top M2 hoping that such an attempt just gets more P2 invites sent

So every team in those leagues are elite, well hell, its lucky they ever lose a game to us peons. Just because you joined either the B10 or SEC 100 years ago, sure does not make you elite, just luck of the draw. Not every team in those leagues is going to be able to keep up with the rising costs of NIL and without more media money coming their way, I really doubt they would be for it.
As long as the member schools of the SEC and B10 can keep the status quo, they will be fine, meaning the most money rolling in, but who's to say that the networks when this re renegotiated will want to keep upping the payments?
Equal payments to all teams is one of the major reasons the NFL is so successful, it doesn't matter the location of the team, or how much its won in the past, EVERY TEAM in the league gets an EQUAL share of the media revenue. Put the into place in college sports and see where we can go.

 

[Big Daddy Kang]

You don't know what the word "literally" really means: "The adverb literally means exactly what is stated, word-for-word, without exaggeration."

Here are the two CBC statements. The Dec 2025 statement does literally address the right to unionize which Cruz-Cantwell has left the door open to and SCORE didn't. It also literally addresses excessive coaching salaries but not literally capping athlete earnings. Cruz-Cantwell does address RevShare cap adjustments in alignment with the House Settlement (which athletes concurred to) and future revenue changes while obviously not capping CSC approved NIL earnings.

And obviously the May 2026 CBC statement is totally unrelated to athlete earnings.

Congressional Black Caucus

The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has been committed to using the full Constitutional power, statutory authority, and financial resources of the federal government to ensure that African Americans and other marginalized communities in the United States have the opportunity to achieve the...

cbc.house.gov

Congressional Black Caucus

The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has been committed to using the full Constitutional power, statutory authority, and financial resources of the federal government to ensure that African Americans and other marginalized communities in the United States have the opportunity to achieve the...

cbc.house.gov

Others, if not most, literally have a less literal interpretation of "literally".

 

[FinalFourCy]

So every team in those leagues are elite, well hell, its lucky they ever lose a game to us peons.

No. Where the **** did you get that?

I argued the opposite

 

[cykadelic2]

Miami has been in the ACC 8 years longer than it was in the Big East and UCF was never in the Big East.

Explain how this is 'rational' to anyone but you? This is up there with Northwestern not getting to be in the Big 10 anymore because reasons?

Been through this before with you. 7x10 isn't going to be "perfect" to satisfy your simpleton mind. If done, will be primarily legacy schools in the SEC, PAC, B10 and ACC.

I have linked the Athletic's 7x10 rational proposal (actually 8x10 as they include a ten-team G5 conference) which I think should be modified to have UCF in the Big East to replace ND (they stay indy) and backfill with Colorado St or Boise St in the B12.

Miami's best FB years were as a member of the Big East so there are some legacy ties and they would serve as a tentpole program for that conference. UCF would be a much better fit in the Big East than as an outlier in the B12 and would also serve as a new rival and travel partner for Miami.

And if the B10 insists on NW over PSU or insists on foolishly having 11, then so be it. NW would still get B10 payouts if moved out (as proposed by the Athletic) and they wouldn't be giving up any rivalry game of note except for Illinois who they could still schedule annually in a non con game.

But why do you care anyway given your insistence that Cruz-Cantwell will never pass (and you don't even want it to pass)? You sure get your panties in a wad anytime the concept is brought up.

How an 80-team, 8-division college football ‘Super League’ would’ve looked last season

How would College Sports Tomorrow's proposed setup to overhaul top-level college football have played out in 2023?

www.nytimes.com

 

[Al_4_State]

I think this is just such a funny post as most on here have been bemoaning how college sports is now the haves and have nots (P2 vs the rest) and then you have posts like this desiring even more unequal rev share and creating a permanent separation of the top which just takes what’s happening today and makes it so you don’t get an Indiana, or Miami, or others who rise up.

So in reality you don’t want more parity, or any type of balance as people claim you just want more people to be along side you with zero chance to ever compete.

Wild take, I get it, it’s very British of you all but I understand. Just nice to have people say it

Very much part of it.

 

[FinalFourCy]

I think this is just such a funny post as most on here have been bemoaning how college sports is now the haves and have nots (P2 vs the rest) and then you have posts like this desiring even more unequal rev share and creating a permanent separation of the top which just takes what’s happening today and makes it so you don’t get an Indiana, or Miami, or others who rise up.

So in reality you don’t want more parity, or any type of balance as people claim you just want more people to be along side you with zero chance to ever compete.

Wild take, I get it, it’s very British of you all but I understand. Just nice to have people say it

Except it’s not exactly more unequal revenue sharing. Just different unequal revenue sharing. The standard deviation of revenue would lower, suggesting more overall clustering, aka parity. As would the median and mode, with average the same (ignoring movement from single seller leverage & rights appreciation).

More schools being at similar revenue levels likely more parity by all measures except national titles.

CFP access, player mobility, transfer rules and salary cap level are as big to competitive parity as equal revenue sharing.

Never mind the aspect that once 50+ schools were align on not getting subsidized by elites, the next step would be that huge bloc reining in elites (spending cap)

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Except it’s not exactly more unequal revenue sharing. Just different unequal revenue sharing. The standard deviation of revenue would lower, suggesting more overall clustering, aka parity. As would the median and mode, with average the same (ignoring movement from single seller leverage & rights appreciation).

More schools being at similar revenue levels likely more parity by all measures except national titles.

CFP access, player mobility, transfer rules and salary cap level are as big to competitive parity as equal revenue sharing.

Never mind the aspect that once 50+ schools were align on not getting subsidized by elites, the next step would be that huge bloc reining in elites (spending cap)

Your own talking points run completely counter intuitive to what you have always posted if those 50+ school can reign in the elites in your mind, well that’s the exact set up the P2 already have. You post constantly how the vast majority of the big ten is being subsidized with equal revenue share, so by your logic that bloc is able to reign in the elites in the same way at a conference level.

Yet this same logic is why you and others have been spouting that an unequal rev share is imminent in the conferences because the elites have all the cards and will push for it. So how in your scenario do the non elite schools get this sudden power when those percentages are even more in line with how the current P2 are constructed?

Once you guys actually talk through these points just like how it’s never about parity or teams getting saved it’s about dragging more teams down to not compete for titles, then you see why this logic falls apart

Again I get it and would feel very similar if the roles were reversed but let’s be honest here

 

[HouClone]

I don't agree on the unequal revenue sharing, but I am skewed. It would be the same 10-15 teams every year, boring. It would be like MLB before the luxury tax. Still not great instead of a hard cap but better than before where it was the Yankees and everybody else. Get everybody the same playing field and let the coaching and talent evaluation dictate wins and losses.

Saying all of that, to get the Big 10 and SEC on board with pooling, we have to compromise for some unequal revenue. Then down the road after the Big 12 does some damage in the CFP, we can work to equal.

 

[Kinch]

It’s really funny reading the crocodile tears from Texas over getting outbid for players.

 

[FinalFourCy]

I don't agree on the unequal revenue sharing, but I am skewed. It would be the same 10-15 teams every year, boring. It would be like MLB before the luxury tax. Still not great instead of a hard cap but better than before where it was the Yankees and everybody else. Get everybody the same playing field and let the coaching and talent evaluation dictate wins and losses.

Saying all of that, to get the Big 10 and SEC on board with pooling, we have to compromise for some unequal revenue. Then down the road after the Big 12 does some damage in the CFP, we can work to equal.

You mean it would be like college football except for last year?

Player mobility and player salaries would mean there is still way more postseason parity than ever before. Schools still couldn’t hoard talent like in previous eras. IU didn’t spend on football to the level of many programs last season, for example

And with more schools clustered in revenue, more parity overall

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

College athletics has 5 years left in it, then it becomes the next NASCAR/MLB.

 

[Kinch]

Games involving Big 12 have outdrawn games involving SEC at the softball World Series.
(Comparing SEC- Big 10 game with Big 12-Big 10 game).

 

[BadBoi]

Games involving Big 12 have outdrawn games involving SEC at the softball World Series.
(Comparing SEC- Big 10 game with Big 12-Big 10 game).

Means nothing

 

[FinalFourCy]

Means nothing

2 million for softball because there’s nothing else on means they’ll be thinking of some spring football again

 

[FinalFourCy]

There’s a lot not to like in the bill, arguably not a genuine effort to have a passable legislation, but this is spot on

 

[ZorkClone]

There’s a lot not to like in the bill, arguably not a genuine effort to have a passable legislation, but this is spot on

Why do you think it's not a genuine effort?

Also, doesn't it make sense for them to bring it people in the industry to talk about the bill that would have a huge impact on them? Who else would they ask?