Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[Al_4_State]

Geographic proximity is #1, but we just happened to jump over two entire states' worth of schools to make sure Ohio State and Michigan aren't in the same division.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5809686/2024/10/01/college-football-super-league-student/

I'd rather they put Mizzou in the Midwest division and us in the Plains. Only having 1 Big 8 opponent would suck. I guess we could use the non-con to schedule KSU, KU, OK State, etc.

My ideal 72 school league would have 8 divisions of 9 schools. Ours would be:
ISU
Nebraska
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma State
Mizzou
Iowa
Oklahoma
Minnesota

 

[KnappShack]

A group called College Sports Tomorrow (CST) wants to reform college football as we know it.

CST is a 20-person group that includes executives from universities like West Virginia and Syracuse, the NFL and Philadelphia 76ers owner David Blitzer.

Goddam self-appointed king makers. A mother ******* elite cabal looking to....wait. Hold up. ISU is in there.

Oh well, whatever, nevermind

 

[cykadelic2]

Geographic proximity is #1, but we just happened to jump over two entire states' worth of schools to make sure Ohio State and Michigan aren't in the same division.

Original CST configuration had 70 schools according to the Athletic with seven 10 team conferences as follows that would also apply to other sports as well. This is a helluva lot better than what that NYT guy is suggesting:

ACC: Florida State, NC State, North Carolina, Clemson, Duke, Maryland, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest

Big East: Louisville, Notre Dame, West Virginia, Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, Cincinnati

Big Ten: Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Purdue, Michigan State, Indiana,

Frequent Flyer Division: Missouri, Kansas State, Kansas, Utah, Iowa State, Northwestern, UCF, Nebraska, BYU, Colorado

PAC 10: Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Oregon State, USC, UCLA, Cal, Washington State, Arizona State, Stanford,

SEC: Georgia, Alabama, Ole Miss, LSU, Tennessee, Kentucky, Auburn, Florida, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Southwest: Texas, SMU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston, Arkansas, Baylor

To make this even better, move UCF to the Big East, ND can remain an Indy and replace UCF with Colorado St.

 

[ClubCy]

Original CST configuration had 70 schools according to the Athletic with seven 10 team conferences as follows that would also apply to other sports as well. This is a helluva lot better than what that NYT guy is suggesting:

ACC: Florida State, NC State, North Carolina, Clemson, Duke, Maryland, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest

Big East: Louisville, Notre Dame, West Virginia, Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, Cincinnati

Big Ten: Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Purdue, Michigan State, Indiana,

Frequent Flyer Division: Missouri, Kansas State, Kansas, Utah, Iowa State, Northwestern, UCF, Nebraska, BYU, Colorado

PAC 10: Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Oregon State, USC, UCLA, Cal, Washington State, Arizona State, Stanford,

SEC: Georgia, Alabama, Ole Miss, LSU, Tennessee, Kentucky, Auburn, Florida, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Southwest: Texas, SMU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston, Arkansas, Baylor

To make this even better, move UCF to the Big East, ND can remain an Indy and replace UCF with Colorado St.

How is that better?

Also, this will not happen.

 

[CyCrazy]

How is that better?

Also, this will not happen.

Its not

 

[cykadelic2]

How is that better?

Also, this will not happen.

Of course it's better because it recognizes historical conference configurations/rivalries for the most part as well as creating conferences that would apply for all sports beyond football (unlike the NYT proposal).

And keep saying it won't happen. The existing P4 conferences are a complete fiasco and any sinister plans by ESPN/SEC and Fox/B10 to create a separate P2 that would relegate and destroy more schools besides Oregon St and Washington St will trigger Fed intervention and anti-trust lawsuits. There are multiple compelling reasons why there is PE, ACC, B12 and even SEC representation on the CST. And not to mention there are millions of TV dollars not being realized due to the existing ESPN/Fox stranglehold on the sport and the obvious need to aggregate P4 TV inventory, realign the existing conferences and bid out regular season and CFP inventory NFL-style (which ESPN and Fox obviously don't want).

 

[ClubCy]

Of course it's better because it recognizes historical conference configurations/rivalries for the most part as well as creating conferences that would apply for all sports beyond football (unlike the NYT proposal).

And keep saying it won't happen. The existing P4 conferences are a complete fiasco and any sinister plans by ESPN/SEC and Fox/B10 to create a separate P2 that would relegate and destroy more schools besides Oregon St and Washington St will trigger Fed intervention and anti-trust lawsuits. There are multiple compelling reasons why there is PE, ACC, B12 and even SEC representation on the CST. And not to mention there are millions of TV dollars not being realized due to the existing ESPN/Fox stranglehold on the sport and the obvious need to aggregate P4 TV inventory, realign the existing conferences and bid out regular season and CFP inventory NFL-style (which ESPN and Fox obviously don't want).

Ah yes the historical configuration that includes Iowa State, Northwestern, BYU, Utah, and UCF or Colorado State.

I also wish I got $5 for every time you have posted that 2nd paragraph.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Of course it's better because it recognizes historical conference configurations/rivalries for the most part as well as creating conferences that would apply for all sports beyond football (unlike the NYT proposal).

And keep saying it won't happen. The existing P4 conferences are a complete fiasco and any sinister plans by ESPN/SEC and Fox/B10 to create a separate P2 that would relegate and destroy more schools besides Oregon St and Washington St will trigger Fed intervention and anti-trust lawsuits. There are multiple compelling reasons why there is PE, ACC, B12 and even SEC representation on the CST. And not to mention there are millions of TV dollars not being realized due to the existing ESPN/Fox stranglehold on the sport and the obvious need to aggregate P4 TV inventory, realign the existing conferences and bid out regular season and CFP inventory NFL-style (which ESPN and Fox obviously don't want).

So while I don’t believe for a second federal anti trust lawsuits would happen or go anywhere for a variety of reasons for arguments sake let’s say you’re right. Isn’t that all the more reason why a P2 breakaway super league wouldn’t happen? You say the conferences are a fiasco but the SEC and Big Ten are pretty happy with the way things are. Unless something seismic changes why would wow the conference ever agree to this? Such a move would have to be voted on as well and there is no way you could get enough schools to sign off and agree.

 

[Big_Sill]

Of course it's better because it recognizes historical conference configurations/rivalries for the most part as well as creating conferences that would apply for all sports beyond football (unlike the NYT proposal).

And keep saying it won't happen. The existing P4 conferences are a complete fiasco and any sinister plans by ESPN/SEC and Fox/B10 to create a separate P2 that would relegate and destroy more schools besides Oregon St and Washington St will trigger Fed intervention and anti-trust lawsuits. There are multiple compelling reasons why there is PE, ACC, B12 and even SEC representation on the CST. And not to mention there are millions of TV dollars not being realized due to the existing ESPN/Fox stranglehold on the sport and the obvious need to aggregate P4 TV inventory, realign the existing conferences and bid out regular season and CFP inventory NFL-style (which ESPN and Fox obviously don't want).

SEC and B10 will never agree to it, they will have to be forced which is risky (a risk I do think we need to take).

 

[cykadelic2]

So while I don’t believe for a second federal anti trust lawsuits would happen or go anywhere for a variety of reasons for arguments sake let’s say you’re right. Isn’t that all the more reason why a P2 breakaway super league wouldn’t happen? You say the conferences are a fiasco but the SEC and Big Ten are pretty happy with the way things are. Unless something seismic changes why would wow the conference ever agree to this? Such a move would have to be voted on as well and there is no way you could get enough schools to sign off and agree.

Coast to coast conferences are a fiasco. The only reason they exist is to create a few more additional prime TV matchups on an annual basis for ESPN and Fox. That is it. Everything else about them (excessive & unnecessary travel expense for starters, unbalanced scheduling, etc.) basically sucks. And worse, the last round of realignment unnecessarily destroyed Oregon St and Washington St.

And Fox and ESPN want to further consolidate and reduce the number of P4 schools so they don't have to pay as many schools and Sankey/Petitti are their puppets in achieving that goal.

And I am willing to bet the majority of existing P4 schools would vote in favor of this when you consider every ACC and B12 would vote for it and a % of B10 (e.g. Iowa) and SEC (e.g. Vanderbilt/UK) schools would do so as well.

 

[ClubCy]

Coast to coast conferences are a fiasco. The only reason they exist is to create a few more additional prime TV matchups on an annual basis for ESPN and Fox. That is it. Everything else about them (excessive & unnecessary travel expense for starters, unbalanced scheduling, etc.) basically sucks. And worse, the last round of realignment unnecessarily destroyed Oregon St and Washington St.

And Fox and ESPN want to further consolidate and reduce the number of P4 schools so they don't have to pay as many schools and Sankey/Petitti are their puppets in achieving that goal.

And I am willing to bet the majority of existing P4 schools would vote in favor of this when you consider every ACC and B12 would vote for it and a % of B10 (e.g. Iowa) and SEC (e.g. Vanderbilt/UK) schools would do so as well.

Surely if this EVER even got to the table unequal revenue sharing would have to be a guarantee for the blue bloods for them to even consider it.

Why would Iowa or Purdue or Miss St sign up for this to essentially take a pay cut when currently they can make as much money as Ohio State and Texas to then get paid like NC State and Iowa State?

 

[cykadelic2]

Surely if this EVER even got to the table unequal revenue sharing would have to be a guarantee for the blue bloods for them to even consider it.

Why would Iowa or Purdue or Miss St sign up for this to essentially take a pay cut when currently they can make as much money as Ohio State and Texas to then get paid like NC State and Iowa State?

Unequal revenue sharing is part of the CST package as previously reported by the Athletic and it would presumably be based on TV ratings and CFP advancement which would facilitate approval by lower tier SEC and B10 schools not happy with the their 16/18 team configurations that cause dilution of their existing shares.

 

[Gonzo]

SEC and B10 will never agree to it, they will have to be forced which is risky (a risk I do think we need to take).

Forced by who?

 

[isucy86]

I have trouble seeing where media partners are going to pay top dollar for a 70ish team Super League. Here is viewership by week.

With only 12-15 games each week attaining 1M+ viewers and another 10 games over 500k viewers- why would TV executives pay big money for 30-35 games each week?

With realignment to date, the Big10 and SEC have 34 teams. There might be 5-10 Big12/ACC teams that the Big10/SEC might view as high value targets. And that assumes NIL and employee status don't make some lower tier Big10 & SEC Presidents think twice about investing what it'll take to be competitive in a Super League.

Just not seeing a Super League being more than 40-50 schools.

 

[CyCrazy]

Coast to coast conferences are a fiasco. The only reason they exist is to create a few more additional prime TV matchups on an annual basis for ESPN and Fox. That is it. Everything else about them (excessive & unnecessary travel expense for starters, unbalanced scheduling, etc.) basically sucks. And worse, the last round of realignment unnecessarily destroyed Oregon St and Washington St.

And Fox and ESPN want to further consolidate and reduce the number of P4 schools so they don't have to pay as many schools and Sankey/Petitti are their puppets in achieving that goal.

And I am willing to bet the majority of existing P4 schools would vote in favor of this when you consider every ACC and B12 would vote for it and a % of B10 (e.g. Iowa) and SEC (e.g. Vanderbilt/UK) schools would do so as well.

You have lost your marbles.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Unequal revenue sharing is part of the CST package as previously reported by the Athletic and it would presumably be based on TV ratings and CFP advancement which would facilitate approval by lower tier SEC and B10 schools not happy with the their 16/18 team configurations that cause dilution of their existing shares.

Wait that’s the exact opposite of what would happen. There is no dilution only cash, why would those lower tier P2 schools want unequal revenues sharing?

This is way way off base

 

[1UNI2ISU]

I don't know how else there is to frame this.

WE ALREADY HAVE OUR TWO 'SUPER' LEAGUES.

If there was anything else of great value left, those properties would be in the SEC/Big Ten. If there was some grand conspiracy from TV networks, don't you think that ESPN would have tipped the scales to get FSU/Clemson/Miami/whoever else out of the ACC agreement and into the SEC by now. Instead they locked those properties into a crazy long term deal that they knew was going to be way undermarket, to the network's benefit.

I also believe that your Ohio States, Alabamas, Georgias, etc are more that fine with the bottom of their leagues getting the same money they do because those blue bloods know they have built in advantages over your Mississippi States, South Carolinas and Indianas of the world that those lower tier programs are never going to be able to overcome, especially since NIL is going to remain the wild, wild west even after they're paying players.

This is the final form. Sure there may be some jockeying around the edges in the P2 or some kind of ACC/Big 12 merger in the future (giant mistake IMO) but the networks have the 34 schools they want.

 

[ClubCy]

Unequal revenue sharing is part of the CST package as previously reported by the Athletic and it would presumably be based on TV ratings and CFP advancement which would facilitate approval by lower tier SEC and B10 schools not happy with the their 16/18 team configurations that cause dilution of their existing shares.

What!?! Who is diluting their shares?

 

[cykadelic2]

Wait that’s the exact opposite of what would happen. There is no dilution only cash, why would those lower tier P2 schools want unequal revenues sharing?

They net more higher payouts even with unequal revenue sharing due to aggregation and bidding out of TV inventory NFL style. The SEC and B10 will each get higher payouts based on TV ratings and instead of that pie being shared with 16 or 18 schools, it shared with only 10 in each conference.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

They net more higher payouts even with unequal revenue sharing due to aggregation and bidding out of TV inventory NFL style. The SEC and B10 will each get higher payouts based on TV ratings and instead of that pie being shared with 16 or 18 schools, it shared with only 10 in each conference.

This is extremely wrong. In what world is Vanderbilt or miss state getting more money in this situation? There won’t be the big ten and sec anymore which is the point. Those bottom and mid teams would never agree to it.

I mean this has zero chance of happening anyways but your logic on this part doesn’t even make sense