(01-04-2012 01:47 PM)Scroggins Wrote:  

(01-04-2012 01:34 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  Keep this in mind, the Superconference would not be or consist of the ACC, Big East, SEC, ect, those conferences would be left for the lower level teams that didn’t make it into the Superconference.

Out of a lack of a better name, say we call the Superconference the North American Conference (NAC).

The NAC would be a football only conference and would consist of 4 divisions (call them the North, South, East, and West) and within each division there is an A division consisting of 9 teams, and B division consisting of 9 teams. (I’m trying to avoid using the word conference so its not thought of in the traditional sense. ) So what you have is the top 72 football programs in this Superconference, grouped geographically, governed by a single conference governing body.

The first round of the playoffs would be each A and B division winners playing off to determine a final 4 consisting of a North, South, East, and West champion.

Round 2 North plays South, East plays West to determine your final 2.

Round 3 is the national championship game.

The playoffs would consist of 7 games total, last 3 weeks, and those 7 bowl games would constitute the BCS bowl series.

The NAC would negotiate national TV deals just like the NFL, and at the end of the season the TV and Bowl money can be pooled and split between all 72 teams, on an escalating scale with a greater amount of money going to the division winners, then a greater amount then that going to the North South, East, and West winners, the 2 teams in the national championship game receive even more, and the largest share going to the national champion.

Basketball teams would continue the current conference structure and play in the NCAA Tournament just as things currently are.

The landscape of college football is changing; if you were told 10 years ago the college football teams were going to be aligned as they are today would you have believed that? Hell just over 10 years ago the Big East didn’t even have football.

For that to happen you'd have to assume that greed and egos would just step aside and sit quietly. Not gonna happen. You need to factor in greed and egos on the part of presidents, commissioners, coaches, players, fans, boosters, etc... when you come up with plausible scenarios.

A single college football entity would mean a tremendous payday for a Super conference and all its members, much better than the ones the mid level teams are experiencing. You make a great point about money, but think about it, if the presidents of the universities at 18 of top 25 football programs in the country decided a Superconference model was in their best interest ($$$$$$$$$) you don’t think the other schools would follow? What leg would the conference commissioners have to stand on? You don’t think CBS, ABC, or ESPN would pay the exit fees for LSU, Alabama, Ok State, Boise State, Penn State (and the list goes on) to lock them into a long term TV deal. A super conference feeds right into the schools greed, the strong 70 survive, the CUSA and MAC schools as well as the weak teams in the strong conferences are left to pick up the scraps. Teams jump now from conference to conference for nothing but money, you think greed will make they stay together?

(01-04-2012 02:42 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(01-04-2012 01:47 PM)Scroggins Wrote:  

(01-04-2012 01:34 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  Keep this in mind, the Superconference would not be or consist of the ACC, Big East, SEC, ect, those conferences would be left for the lower level teams that didn’t make it into the Superconference.

Out of a lack of a better name, say we call the Superconference the North American Conference (NAC).

The NAC would be a football only conference and would consist of 4 divisions (call them the North, South, East, and West) and within each division there is an A division consisting of 9 teams, and B division consisting of 9 teams. (I’m trying to avoid using the word conference so its not thought of in the traditional sense. ) So what you have is the top 72 football programs in this Superconference, grouped geographically, governed by a single conference governing body.

The first round of the playoffs would be each A and B division winners playing off to determine a final 4 consisting of a North, South, East, and West champion.

Round 2 North plays South, East plays West to determine your final 2.

Round 3 is the national championship game.

The playoffs would consist of 7 games total, last 3 weeks, and those 7 bowl games would constitute the BCS bowl series.

The NAC would negotiate national TV deals just like the NFL, and at the end of the season the TV and Bowl money can be pooled and split between all 72 teams, on an escalating scale with a greater amount of money going to the division winners, then a greater amount then that going to the North South, East, and West winners, the 2 teams in the national championship game receive even more, and the largest share going to the national champion.

Basketball teams would continue the current conference structure and play in the NCAA Tournament just as things currently are.

The landscape of college football is changing; if you were told 10 years ago the college football teams were going to be aligned as they are today would you have believed that? Hell just over 10 years ago the Big East didn’t even have football.

For that to happen you'd have to assume that greed and egos would just step aside and sit quietly. Not gonna happen. You need to factor in greed and egos on the part of presidents, commissioners, coaches, players, fans, boosters, etc... when you come up with plausible scenarios.

A single college football entity would mean a tremendous payday for a Super conference and all its members, much better than the ones the mid level teams are experiencing. You make a great point about money, but think about it, if the presidents of the universities at 18 of top 25 football programs in the country decided a Superconference model was in their best interest ($$$$$$$$$) you don’t think the other schools would follow? What leg would the conference commissioners have to stand on? You don’t think CBS, ABC, or ESPN would pay the exit fees for LSU, Alabama, Ok State, Boise State, Penn State (and the list goes on) to lock them into a long term TV deal. A super conference feeds right into the schools greed, the strong 70 survive, the CUSA and MAC schools as well as the weak teams in the strong conferences are left to pick up the scraps. Teams jump now from conference to conference for nothing but money, you think greed will make they stay together?

I think this is far more likely....

http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=54...pid7382791

Your scenario is not nearly bloody enough.

(01-04-2012 02:49 PM)Scroggins Wrote:  

(01-04-2012 02:42 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(01-04-2012 01:47 PM)Scroggins Wrote:  

(01-04-2012 01:34 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  Keep this in mind, the Superconference would not be or consist of the ACC, Big East, SEC, ect, those conferences would be left for the lower level teams that didn’t make it into the Superconference.

Out of a lack of a better name, say we call the Superconference the North American Conference (NAC).

The NAC would be a football only conference and would consist of 4 divisions (call them the North, South, East, and West) and within each division there is an A division consisting of 9 teams, and B division consisting of 9 teams. (I’m trying to avoid using the word conference so its not thought of in the traditional sense. ) So what you have is the top 72 football programs in this Superconference, grouped geographically, governed by a single conference governing body.

The first round of the playoffs would be each A and B division winners playing off to determine a final 4 consisting of a North, South, East, and West champion.

Round 2 North plays South, East plays West to determine your final 2.

Round 3 is the national championship game.

The playoffs would consist of 7 games total, last 3 weeks, and those 7 bowl games would constitute the BCS bowl series.

The NAC would negotiate national TV deals just like the NFL, and at the end of the season the TV and Bowl money can be pooled and split between all 72 teams, on an escalating scale with a greater amount of money going to the division winners, then a greater amount then that going to the North South, East, and West winners, the 2 teams in the national championship game receive even more, and the largest share going to the national champion.

Basketball teams would continue the current conference structure and play in the NCAA Tournament just as things currently are.

The landscape of college football is changing; if you were told 10 years ago the college football teams were going to be aligned as they are today would you have believed that? Hell just over 10 years ago the Big East didn’t even have football.

For that to happen you'd have to assume that greed and egos would just step aside and sit quietly. Not gonna happen. You need to factor in greed and egos on the part of presidents, commissioners, coaches, players, fans, boosters, etc... when you come up with plausible scenarios.

A single college football entity would mean a tremendous payday for a Super conference and all its members, much better than the ones the mid level teams are experiencing. You make a great point about money, but think about it, if the presidents of the universities at 18 of top 25 football programs in the country decided a Superconference model was in their best interest ($$$$$$$$$) you don’t think the other schools would follow? What leg would the conference commissioners have to stand on? You don’t think CBS, ABC, or ESPN would pay the exit fees for LSU, Alabama, Ok State, Boise State, Penn State (and the list goes on) to lock them into a long term TV deal. A super conference feeds right into the schools greed, the strong 70 survive, the CUSA and MAC schools as well as the weak teams in the strong conferences are left to pick up the scraps. Teams jump now from conference to conference for nothing but money, you think greed will make they stay together?

I think this is far more likely....

http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=54...pid7382791

Your scenario is not nearly bloody enough.

Well, it could definitely get interesting!

4 16-team superconferences looks nice and neat on paper and easily lends itself to an NFL-style playoff system, which is why so many bloggers and sportswriters gravitate to it. The problem is that creating those superconferences is very messy and causes conferences to take on schools that wouldn't otherwise add for various reasons (whether it's markets, academics, brand names, etc.). University presidents simply don't do that.

Any superconference would need one of these two schools joining it to make it financially viable: Texas and/or Notre Dame. Obviously, 4 conferences can't share Texas and Notre Dame (although that would be an interesting hypothetical). Therein lies the rub.

One other issue. It seems to me that with some conferences (the Big Ten being the primary one) and schools (Texas) it;s not so much about making the most money: it's about making more money than the competition. Thus therein lies the advantage. Remember, those in charge do not get to keep profits like corporations do. So their end goal, is not to make the most money for all, it is to put their program at an advantage over the others.

(01-04-2012 03:05 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  4 16-team superconferences looks nice and neat on paper and easily lends itself to an NFL-style playoff system, which is why so many bloggers and sportswriters gravitate to it. The problem is that creating those superconferences is very messy and causes conferences to take on schools that wouldn't otherwise add for various reasons (whether it's markets, academics, brand names, etc.). University presidents simply don't do that.

Any superconference would need one of these two schools joining it to make it financially viable: Texas and/or Notre Dame. Obviously, 4 conferences can't share Texas and Notre Dame (although that would be an interesting hypothetical). Therein lies the rub.

That’s the point, its not 4 conferences, it’s a single conference with 4 divisions. It’s the power of negotiations for TV rights as a single entity. Kind of like the old NFL and AFL merger but on a larger scale.

(01-04-2012 03:12 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  One other issue. It seems to me that with some conferences (the Big Ten being the primary one) and schools (Texas) it;s not so much about making the most money: it's about making more money than the competition. Thus therein lies the advantage. Remember, those in charge do not get to keep profits like corporations do. So their end goal, is not to make the most money for all, it is to put their program at an advantage over the others.

That’s a VERY good point. I think you would definitely have hold outs, but once say 15 of the top 20 programs buy in, it will be get in or be left out in the cold kind of thing. Say Texas decided to stay out, who would be left to play? What kind of TV revenue would those games bring in? It’s almost like a big snowball effect, once it starts rolling either get on board or be run over by it. I think the biggest issue is getting it started and rolling, from there it would take on a life of its own. It would not be unlike how Big East basketball conference started, only on a much larger scale and for football only.

(01-04-2012 03:12 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  One other issue. It seems to me that with some conferences (the Big Ten being the primary one) and schools (Texas) it;s not so much about making the most money: it's about making more money than the competition. Thus therein lies the advantage. Remember, those in charge do not get to keep profits like corporations do. So their end goal, is not to make the most money for all, it is to put their program at an advantage over the others.

Exactly. It is about Notre Dame, Texas, USC, etc... having a certain "status" tied in to athletics that a Houston or a Temple do not have. In the world of Frat Boys and Fan Boys that status carries prestige.

There are some schools such as MIT and Wesleyan that long ago decided that they were not interested in catering to that type of crowd but that's not who the "Big Boys" are competing against for status because really they live in different worlds. The so-called Big Boys are competing against each other as well as medium and small athletic factories such as Louisville, Boise State, Utah, Akron, UAB, etc...

When you are unable or unwilling to base your reputation as a school on having a community of truly intellectual scholars then you have to use something else as a measuring stick and a tool for differentiation. Having the biggest and fastest jocks wearing uniforms with the name of your school and broadcasting this to millions on television is to the Notre Dame's, Auburn's, UCLA's, etc... the equivalent of producing Nobel Prize winners at MIT, Chicago, Johns Hopkins, etc...

(01-04-2012 03:20 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  Say Texas decided to stay out, who would be left to play? What kind of TV revenue would those games bring in?

I think you missed the first part of that. The Big Ten would likely want no part of that - Jim Delaney has as much said so when asked why there was no playoff, that his concern is to do what is best for the Big Ten compared ot everyone else, not what is best for colelge football as a whole. An equal revenue sharing system is not in the best interests of thos eon top (the Big Ten, SEC, Texas, and Notre Dame), and now that the PAc 12 is sitting on top of the world monetarily, they would likely want to see how much it helps them, and so on. Thus, the people in charge have no incnetive to do so,a dn thus you will never get any traction. The ACC, Big East, and Big XII can do whatever they want, hell add the Pac 12 in there as well, but if you don't get the Big Ten involved, it will not happen.

(01-04-2012 03:57 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(01-04-2012 03:20 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  Say Texas decided to stay out, who would be left to play? What kind of TV revenue would those games bring in?

I think you missed the first part of that. The Big Ten would likely want no part of that - Jim Delaney has as much said so when asked why there was no playoff, that his concern is to do what is best for the Big Ten compared ot everyone else, not what is best for colelge football as a whole. An equal revenue sharing system is not in the best interests of thos eon top (the Big Ten, SEC, Texas, and Notre Dame), and now that the PAc 12 is sitting on top of the world monetarily, they would likely want to see how much it helps them, and so on. Thus, the people in charge have no incnetive to do so,a dn thus you will never get any traction. The ACC, Big East, and Big XII can do whatever they want, hell add the Pac 12 in there as well, but if you don't get the Big Ten involved, it will not happen.

All very good points, like I said originally, it’s just a concept, just a topic for discussion. I appreciate everyone’s input!

I doubt the scenario where the 64 or whatever "elite in their own minds" teams break off and start a sub league. That could open everything up to new levels of conflict. Imagine a push to end public funding of the participating universities in the 64 - if they really want to go it alone, let them pay for everything themselves. Imagine a ban on cross league play. The 64 team league would also not be part of the NCAA, while the leftovers would be free to reform under the NCAA banner and create a playoff with a NCAA endorsed champion.

They stand to make less money by being exclusive than being inclusive. They need and want the rest - if only to help them attain their selfish aims. So I don't foresee a 64 team league break-off.

We're headed inevitably towards a real playoff. The sooner aholes like Delaney and Slive are shown the door in CFB, the better the sport will be. It is not semi-professional. It is amateur school athletes. Trying to make it something it's not will ultimately fail.

(01-04-2012 04:39 PM)Boise fan Wrote:  I doubt the scenario where the 64 or whatever "elite in their own minds" teams break off and start a sub league. That could open everything up to new levels of conflict. Imagine a push to end public funding of the participating universities in the 64 - if they really want to go it alone, let them pay for everything themselves. Imagine a ban on cross league play. The 64 team league would also not be part of the NCAA, while the leftovers would be free to reform under the NCAA banner and create a playoff with a NCAA endorsed champion.

They stand to make less money by being exclusive than being inclusive. They need and want the rest - if only to help them attain their selfish aims. So I don't foresee a 64 team league break-off.

We're headed inevitably towards a real playoff. The sooner aholes like Delaney and Slive are shown the door in CFB, the better the sport will be. It is not semi-professional. It is amateur school athletes. Trying to make it something it's not will ultimately fail.

Sorry, but there is nothing amateur about guys who are basically majoring in football or basketball. Sure, they cluster in something like Interdisciplinary Studies, Kinesiology, or(everyone's favorite) Criminal Justice so they can game the APR(which is basically a joke and a game in itself) but we all know D-I is ringers everywhere. The NCAA can shout from the roof tops that these are actual student athletes just playing sports on the side for fun but the only people believing that crap are the fan boys and the boosters.