Oregon State and Washington State represent a worst-case scenario. They were cast out into the wilderness with no conference and no traditional rivals. A better example might be the Big XII. Like it or not, we are all teams that were passed over to join the Premier League conferences, But the top schools in the conference still draw over a million viewers - more than many Premier League conference members. If you're on the first floor, there's not a lot of places to fall to. Are we to believe the people watching Big XII football would quit watching if we didn't have that one spot in the BCS playoff?
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
I’m of the mind that there won’t be a formal split. The SEC and B1G don’t want a lawsuit. And ESPN was very lucky that Bowlsby played his receipts into something that become constructive.
Instead you’ll see the ACC and XII signing their own lease to 2nd class citizenship in an imbalanced CFP. The 4-4-2-2 proposal is a game of chicken for the ACC and XII to bow down and let the SEC and B1G be the P2.
Like every realignment move, the B1G just happened to benefit from an individual school’s decision. The conference didn’t force anything, they just stumbled upon great opportunities! How sweet. The SEC is more brash in its messaging, and openly wants recognition as top dog.
Sadly, the At Large model is not benefiting the XII. We are a single bit league 2 years in a row. We got to watch Tulane get its doors blown off by Ole Miss - again, while 11 win BYU was on the couch. Last year ESPN propped up its little darling, Boise.
The G5 is not a threat to the P2. But the other guys in the P4 are. We are slowly being starved out.
Instead you’ll see the ACC and XII signing their own lease to 2nd class citizenship in an imbalanced CFP. The 4-4-2-2 proposal is a game of chicken for the ACC and XII to bow down and let the SEC and B1G be the P2.
Like every realignment move, the B1G just happened to benefit from an individual school’s decision. The conference didn’t force anything, they just stumbled upon great opportunities! How sweet. The SEC is more brash in its messaging, and openly wants recognition as top dog.
Sadly, the At Large model is not benefiting the XII. We are a single bit league 2 years in a row. We got to watch Tulane get its doors blown off by Ole Miss - again, while 11 win BYU was on the couch. Last year ESPN propped up its little darling, Boise.
The G5 is not a threat to the P2. But the other guys in the P4 are. We are slowly being starved out.
And if you were put down in a separate division where the rankings didn’t matter.
Yeah slowly over time you would become a school that resembles a directional school. As would any program that got put in a lower division. Overtime you would just be UNI and most people that went to ISU that cared about football would pick a different program or simply not follow
I disagree that rankings and playoffs are the only drivers of fan interest
What point do you think I am trying to prove? I wasn't really trying to prove any crazy point, other than for current adult fans, I don't see them changing any behavior because of exclusion of "their team" from a top-tier, ESPN wet dream league. I agree with your last paragraph.
I’m talking USC and UCLA denying the PAC an opportunity to expand for a secure future and then bolting for the B1G. And then the B1G went, “Aw Shucks, we hate this, but we’ll take them” when Oregon and Washington left.Ahhh Rutgers, the best opportunity that the Big Ten stumbled upon.
You dont have to be an alumni to be a fan of a team.
95% of Iowa fans didnt go to Iowa.
Taking those 4 schools was always the plan IMO. Busting 2 out first and letting chaos happen in the conference likely negated a lot of issues and bad optics that plucking 1/3 of the conference at once would have had.
If I'm the CFB powers to be, the casual fan isn't who I would be mainly concerned about keeping engaged in a top-tier & 2nd-tier structure. I'd be more concerned about alienating CFB fans who currently watch 3-4 games a week (avid fans). Relegate avid fan's school to 2nd class status and those avid fans, after watching their alumni school will seek other viewership options than college football. Or non-TV ways to spend their free time.
IMO for alienated avid CFB fans, there isn't a reason to adopt a new favorite college football team from top-tier leagues.
Then why not just take the 4 immediately? Why even pretend to care about optics?
This is the most aggravating part of conference realignment. The schools and conferences act like their some kind of SO swapping high school social circle
You really think there are 7 million Iowa fans out there? Seems high.
At the time (2022) there was talk that USC didn't support Oregon being added to the Big10 when USC & UCLA joined.
But when it became clear a year later that the Pac12 was dissolving, then timing of adding Oregon & Washington was probably moved up.
The other thing to remember, the Big10's new TV deal was set to be announced in late May 2022, but was delayed. At the time the reasons were unclear, but became obvious a couple weeks later when news of the USC/UCLA adds were announced. I'm sure there had to be a lot of re-negotiations with TV partners and buy-in by the existing 14 schools on $ split to even add UCLA & USC.
You're brain is equating what I said with, "preemptively break away alone and drop down to NAIA". What I actually said was different, but interpret it how you like.
The Pac 12 had a media deal - roughly the same as the Big 12. They refused it.
Massive drop in talent? Would the rosters of the Premier League expand? The number of players in the pool and the number of landing spots for those players wouldn't change. The second tier league wouldn't be handing out $50 Hy Vee gift cards every week - they would still pay players. But you also wouldn't have backup quarterbacks making 7 figures. Would there be the occasional player that decided to take 1.8MM to back up at Alabama versus 1.2MM to start at Kansas? Sure. But playing time and the opportunity to showcase your talent still matter for the vast majority of college athletes.
I would just choose to be proactive with the only leverage the bottom 60 teams of P4 have, which is inventory. Six 10 team divisions, geographically and historically aligned would be valuable.
I don’t think it was ever about optics. It was getting Oregon and Washington at a discount. The optics were already set, remember, “Why did the Big 12 break up the PAC 12 !?”
Financial and competitive relegation of ACC and B12 schools being separated from the SEC and B10 would be absolutely devastating to those impacted schools. Wazzu and Oregon St have already been destroyed which is why there will need to be Fed intervention to prevent additional destruction (and these are JP's words).
Wazzu and Oregon St are just bad examples. If it were 40 schools in that situation, they survive. Neither the Big 12 nor ACC were in a position to offer them a seat on the life boat. Both actually probably would have, but ESPN didn't want it.
I guess I look at it that relegation has already happened. At some point, I believe rules will be put in place regarding player compensation, but those rules will favor the B1G and SEC. Teams in the Big 12 and ACC that don't have a wealthy sports fan on their side and are getting 50% of the media rights compared to the big boys will struggle to come up with what they need year after year.
The bottom line is if given the choice between scraping together every penny possible in order to maybe compete for a chance at making a playoff at the highest level every decade or competing in a league where everyone can spend a certain reasonable amount and must follow certain rules, I would take the latter. In my opinion, winning that 60ish team league would be more satisfying and impressive than getting Phil Knight to cut checks and try to bring in a new all star team every year. If Iowa State had a fan with more money than sense, I might feel differently. But we don't and I don't.
Look at Wazzu. Less than a decade ago they were a peer and even beat us in the Alamo bowl. We just poached their coach and the best guys on their roster.
Fall out has been isolated to a few schools and it’s been framed as a tragic side effect of something no one’s sticking their neck out for.
This is like that saying, “If you owe the bank $100, you have a problem. If you owe the bank $100M, the bank has a problem.”
If 25-40 P4 programs get relegated, the whole system starts to collapse. Yeah ISU’s future looks bleak then, but the whole thing is on fire. And no one goes down quietly.
Good points. ISU has to be small donor powered.
Some schools will have the private capital to weather relegation and buy their way up. SMU could be in the SEC in a decade, taking no payouts. Sounds crazy today but is it that absurd given where things stand?
It’s funny because caps on NIL have been framed as harmful to the players. But the element no one talks about is that caps put a limit on someone’s ego. And those with ego and money don’t like to be told no. The same applies here.
Latest posts
-
Chicago Bears bought Arlington Heights track only to build in Indiana?
- Latest: southernfriedCY
-
-
-
-
