Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[Al_4_State]

Yeah but those big elite brands with huge TV ratings need conference foes to beat up on and keep them propped up. College regular season is 12 games. They need cannon fodder to get to those 11-12 wins every year. And while they may not be as big of brands or bring the TV viewership numbers, that fodder still brings a lot of value. This is why I don't think we'll see unequal sharing of media revenue anytime soon in the B1G. I think we will see unequal distribution of bowl/CFP revenues. So in that sense, the conference will engage in "unequal revenue sharing" just not of the media $$$ IMO.

They can get cannon fodder without equal rev share, or even being in the same "conference" or "division" or whatever.

I think it's silly (not calling you out, just a general statement) to believe that this unhinged greed is just going to magically stop at a certain line in the sand - short of some kind of larger threat (like government intervention). Even if they did, si that even what you want as a fan? If Iowa made some Top 25 Prestige Worldwide set up, they'd be one of the last ones in, and they'd almost never be relevant without some kind of total parity (like we see in the NFL) that runs completely contradictory to how the most powerful entities in the sport have behaved up to this point.

 

[jbhtexas]

Yeah but those big elite brands with huge TV ratings need conference foes to beat up on and keep them propped up. College regular season is 12 games. They need cannon fodder to get to those 11-12 wins every year. And while they may not be as big of brands or bring the TV viewership numbers, that fodder still brings a lot of value. This is why I don't think we'll see unequal sharing of media revenue anytime soon in the B1G. I think we will see unequal distribution of bowl/CFP revenues. So in that sense, the conference will engage in "unequal revenue sharing" just not of the media $$$ IMO.

Why do they need weak teams to beat up on? If you have a league of 30 or so teams, and top 3-4 teams all have 1-3 losses, so what? In fact, it would probably make things more interesting and draw more viewership to have some balance in that size of league, and not have the same teams dominate every year. There will be natural ebb and flow of team strength from year to year, like in the NFL.

 

[Al_4_State]

Agreed.

In my cynical view, it's already decided. The "P2" group is just waiting around to see if anything meaningful or consequential is likely to come out of Congress anytime soon that could disrupt what they want to do, and also letting the situation fester a little more to build up some more faux "frustration" to justify the breakaway. The media analysis to determine which schools maximize the revenue stream is done. Some existing SEC/Big Ten schools are going to be out. A few existing Big 12 and ACC schools might get in.

I'm with Pollard. Just get it over with so the "left-outs" can move on. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the left-outs have already been strategizing behind the scenes.

I think it's going to keep evolving, and shedding.

There may be a breakaway soon, but I highly doubt it will be the final one. There are a tier of schools that have been ahead of everyone else for a long time, and I don't think this ends until they are together and on their own. There will be a post Big 10 and SEC world. I'm not confident of what that looks like, but this is just going to keep going until the snake eats itself.

 

[Gonzo]

Why do they need weak teams to beat up on? If you have a league of 30 or teams, and top 3-4 teams all have 1-3 losses, so what? In fact, it would probably make things more interesting and draw more viewership to have some balance in that size of league, and not have the same teams dominate every year. There will be natural ebb and flow of team strength from year to year, like in the NFL.

Maybe, but I don't see that happening. If there were a superconference of the top 28-30 brands, before long IMO there'd be an established upper half and lower half of that superconference. Then all of a sudden the brand power that those bottom half programs once had would be significantly reduced.

I just don't see programs like tOSU, Georgia, Oregon, Bama, Michigan, Texas, ND, etc. signing up for a system where their entire 12-game season is comprised of playing fellow superpowers every single week.

 

[jbhtexas]

Maybe, but I don't see that happening. If there were a superconference of the top 28-30 brands, before long IMO there'd be an established upper half and lower half of that superconference. Then all of a sudden the brand power that those bottom half programs once had would be significantly reduced.

I just don't see programs like tOSU, Georgia, Oregon, Bama, Michigan, Texas, ND, etc. signing up for a system where their entire 12-game season is comprised of playing fellow superpowers every single week.

IMO they'd sign up for it in a heartbeat if there is sufficient TV revenue to assure that they will always be financially similar (but not necessarily equal) with each other.

But, they'll do whatever maximizes revenue. If that calls for dragging in a few "lesser brands", they'll do it. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Cody Campbell's big spending at TTU isn't at least partially to signal the P2 that TTU can play in their clique and not be a financial burden. BYU would be another one that comes to mind...pretty good but not powerhouse competition with more than sufficient financial backing to not become a drag.

 

[FinalFourCy]

What stops this from going further?

Schools like Purdue and even Iowa are not peers to Ohio State and Texas. The reality of the CFB landscape is that schools 75-20 are pretty damn similar in terms of support, interest, etc. The financial advantage they currently have is simply from the largesse of blue bloods. It's only a matter of time before that ends.

Conference HQ, although I suspect unequal revenue sharing is coming to P2.That is what is unjust- that the composition of the 48ish schools under the big tent is being determined by which big brands were most willing to subsidize their conference.

Imo we should all be rooting for investors/PE to come exploit the inefficiencies of legacy conferences

 

[FinalFourCy]

I hope they never break away but if they did, the TV execs would probably make sure that basketball March Madness still includes all of the schools.

And honestly for the same reason the TV execs are probably going to push to make sure that all conferences are included in a 24 team football playoff. When they say they want to “break away”, I think it really means make all of their own rules and maybe even only play regular season games only against each other. I think a football post season without at least some representation from other conferences would be a non-starter.

Of course the TV executives and P2 want all conferences included. Get all the perks of separating, at no cost

What JP is saying is the M2 and others should not give them both. In essence, although the implications of separating are not equal, it still isn’t ideal for P2/TV if it’s all sports.

The P2 are banking on everyone else giving in because separation would be lethal. JP realizes so is agreeing to P2 wish list

 

[Big_Sill]

Yeah but those big elite brands with huge TV ratings need conference foes to beat up on and keep them propped up. College regular season is 12 games. They need cannon fodder to get to those 11-12 wins every year. And while they may not be as big of brands or bring the TV viewership numbers, that fodder still brings a lot of value. This is why I don't think we'll see unequal sharing of media revenue anytime soon in the B1G. I think we will see unequal distribution of bowl/CFP revenues. So in that sense, the conference will engage in "unequal revenue sharing" just not of the media $$$ IMO.

nobody will need to chase 12-1 and 11-2 seasons anymore. It will operate just like the NFL, 8-5 makes the playoffs. Have to totally change your mindset.

 

[Al_4_State]

Conference HQ, although I suspect unequal revenue sharing is coming to P2.That is what is unjust- that the composition of the 48ish schools under the big tent is being determined by which big brands were most willing to subsidize their conference.

Imo we should all be rooting for investors/PE to come exploit the inefficiencies of legacy conferences

I think conferences will go away eventually. Right now, people like Sankey and Petiti are fat waiting to be cut.

If ESPN and Fox just made these schools their properties for sports, it would save both the schools and the networks money by removing these commissioners and conference offices.

 

[FinalFourCy]

nobody will need to chase 12-1 and 11-2 seasons anymore. It will operate just like the NFL, 8-5 makes the playoffs. Have to totally change your mindset.

Agree. It’s the NFL mindset. More parity. Make the playoffs and go on a run.


But the big brands stand to lose in the new era imo. History and prestige were very exclusive. Making P2 into nfl light, with capped salaries and transfers is giving that up. Everyone having value from being an P2 franchise is at the expense of the OSU’s

They need unequal revenue sharing and uncapped salaries in order to monetize & maintain the brand advantage they’ve built up

 

[FinalFourCy]

I think conferences will go away eventually. Right now, people like Sankey and Petiti are fat waiting to be cut.

If ESPN and Fox just made these schools their properties for sports, it would save both the schools and the networks money by removing these commissioners and conference offices.

Definitely a possibility. The more the dead weight of P2 fail to realize they are filler, and demand equal revenue sharing, the more likely conferences go away

The objective for Big 12 is to maintain long enough so the bottom half of P2 are trying to compete at around the same deficit to elites as M2. Which means being willing to let P2 walk. Maybe they do and destroy M2, but slow culling is worst case scenario for many in m2

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Definitely a possibility. The more the dead weight of P2 fail to realize they are filler, and demand equal revenue sharing, the more likely conferences go away

The objective for Big 12 is to maintain long enough so the bottom half of P2 are trying to compete at around the same deficit to elites as M2. Which means being willing to let P2 walk. Maybe they do and destroy M2, but slow culling is worst case scenario for many in m2

Again, Indiana is exhibit A-Z why this isn’t happening for awhile

 

[FinalFourCy]

Although I think the P2 can do it, this is why I agree with JP on forcing Armageddon if P2 are trying to wield too much power

 

[FinalFourCy]

Again, Indiana is exhibit A-Z why this isn’t happening for awhile

You’re nothing but consistent in your lack of understanding

IU isn’t an example of anything but why the historical elites will look to unequal revenue sharing (based on brand value) to regain their perch

IU represents parity and Greenbloods. Legacy elite football brands used to have a moat against them. Capped salaries, equal revenue sharing, portal, and CFP all eroded that. Uncapped salaries in combination with unequal revenue sharing helps regain the advantage.

And networks make more when big brands are on top of sport

 

[FinalFourCy]

Why JP is saying, if they want cake, they ha have to break away.

 

[Gonzo]

nobody will need to chase 12-1 and 11-2 seasons anymore. It will operate just like the NFL, 8-5 makes the playoffs. Have to totally change your mindset.

We'll see. I think changing the mindset of college football fans who are used to their team going undefeated or maybe losing 1 game every year to one where they finish barely over .500 is much easier said than done.

 

[not-the-manager]

Maybe, but I don't see that happening. If there were a superconference of the top 28-30 brands, before long IMO there'd be an established upper half and lower half of that superconference. Then all of a sudden the brand power that those bottom half programs once had would be significantly reduced.

I just don't see programs like tOSU, Georgia, Oregon, Bama, Michigan, Texas, ND, etc. signing up for a system where their entire 12-game season is comprised of playing fellow superpowers every single week.

You’re still looking at college athletics on May 19th, 2026 all wrong. Brand power would not diminish based on wins and losses. Brand power is history + fan support, i.e., ratings. Look at Nebraska. Look at the doldrums Harbaugh (Stalions) got Michigan out of. bama’s recent downturn made their fans more engaged and desperate. From a revenue standpoint there was no issue with the brands, the teams just weren’t winning. It’s only about money—more specifically, not having to share it. Would you rather finish 28th in the NFL lite, or be in the FCS or some equivalent? Besides, Ohio State thinks they can beat Georgia, bama, Texas, etc. every season, so why would they reject a league modeled after the NFL just because they’d play more good teams? Every roster that’s already outstanding would be even better, as there wouldn’t be any Iowa States stealing diamonds in the rough. So if you’re one of the select few, you figure you can only stand to gain from the culling

Again, Indiana is exhibit A-Z why this isn’t happening for awhile

Indiana is still very, very much the exception, not the rule. That the stars aligned before all hell breaks loose is great for them. But, really, it doesn’t even matter if there are other dormant Indianas out there, because once the P2 start moving everyone will be left behind, even if they were one season away from breaking out

 

[CyCrazy]

We'll see. I think changing the mindset of college football fans who are used to their team going undefeated or maybe losing 1 game every year to one where they finish barely over .500 is much easier said than done.

Most CFB are big NFL fans not sure this will be much of a stretch.

 

[FinalFourCy]

 

[Gonzo]

You’re still looking at college athletics on May 19th, 2026 all wrong. Brand power would not diminish based on wins and losses. Brand power is history + fan support, i.e., ratings. Look at Nebraska. Look at the doldrums Harbaugh (Stalions) got Michigan out of. bama’s recent downturn made their fans more engaged and desperate. From a revenue standpoint there was no issue with the brands, the teams just weren’t winning. It’s only about money—more specifically, not having to share it. Would you rather finish 28th in the NFL lite, or be in the FCS or some equivalent? Besides, Ohio State thinks they can beat Georgia, bama, Texas, etc. every season, so why would they reject a league modeled after the NFL just because they’d play more good teams? Every roster that’s already outstanding would be even better, as there wouldn’t be any Iowa States stealing diamonds in the rough. So if you’re one of the select few, you figure you can only stand to gain from the culling



Indiana is still very, very much the exception, not the rule. That the stars aligned before all hell breaks loose is great for them. But, really, it doesn’t even matter if there are other dormant Indianas out there, because once the P2 start moving everyone will be left behind, even if they were one season away from breaking out

Would you say Clemson's brand power is the same today as it was between 2015-2020?