Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
How large could these leagues get?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,587
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 512
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Upstate SC
Post: #11
RE: How large could these leagues get?
14 is already troublesome. Anything above 16 starts to get downright unwieldy. At that point you would need major rule changes like 3 or 4 divisions and conference semifinals - which aren't likely to pass unless the majority of schools want it (which in turn precludes putting all of the best teams in one or two conferences).
08-24-2017 11:14 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,355
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 670
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #12
RE: How large could these leagues get?
(08-24-2017 11:14 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  14 is already troublesome. Anything above 16 starts to get downright unwieldy. At that point you would need major rule changes like 3 or 4 divisions and conference semifinals - which aren't likely to pass unless the majority of schools want it (which in turn precludes putting all of the best teams in one or two conferences).

Probably, but you never know what regulatory structure changes might bring. What if the NCAA wimps out with UNC and those they regulate waltz out the door to start their own? What if they hammer UNC and those they regulate waltz out the door to start their own?

Mark the future is more precariously positioned for change than ever before. I think the question is when does something major happen with regard to governance and not if it will happen.

That said this is the silly season for one more week, but money and the leverage to get money could lead to much larger units, and I didn't say that, Mike Slive did late last year in an interview with a Birmingham radio station.

So while I think the next moves will be announced around 2019-20 and completed between 2021-22 and that they will most likely only take us to 16, the need for leverage to acquire raises once realignment is essentially over, could well spur us toward mergers into leagues. We'll see.
(This post was last modified: 08-24-2017 12:52 PM by JRsec.)
08-24-2017 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 414
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #13
RE: How large could these leagues get?
(08-24-2017 11:14 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  14 is already troublesome. Anything above 16 starts to get downright unwieldy. At that point you would need major rule changes like 3 or 4 divisions and conference semifinals - which aren't likely to pass unless the majority of schools want it (which in turn precludes putting all of the best teams in one or two conferences).

As I've mentioned before, I'm pro-tradition. The older conference alignments with 8 or 9 or 10 schools.

However, I do think 14 is just a weird number and an anomaly for scheduling. 15 and 16 work far better than 14. Heck, even 18, 20, and some beyond work better than 14.
08-24-2017 12:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
YNot Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,416
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 59
I Root For: BYU
Location:
Post: #14
RE: How large could these leagues get?
(08-24-2017 11:14 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  14 is already troublesome. Anything above 16 starts to get downright unwieldy. At that point you would need major rule changes like 3 or 4 divisions and conference semifinals - which aren't likely to pass unless the majority of schools want it (which in turn precludes putting all of the best teams in one or two conferences).

Who would vote on the rule change to multiple divisions within one conference and to allow the CCG semifinals?

If it's an Autonomy vote and large conferences are on the radar, I could see most of the B1G, SEC, ACC, and even PAC schools voting for flexibility, along with the key B12 targets. Only the likely B12 leftovers would oppose.

If it's a broader vote of FBS membership, the P4 would likely have potential call-up targets and, perhaps the best of the rest conference candidates, on their side. That might be enough to push it through.
08-24-2017 02:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,647
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #15
RE: How large could these leagues get?
(08-24-2017 09:30 AM)Underdog Wrote:  
(08-23-2017 11:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If you assume that G5 schools are on the table because they add unique audiences in a streaming world then how large could some of these leagues grow?

I've thought there's a good chance that the entire Big 12 could find a home in the next iteration of Power leagues and that possibly even a few G5s could make the cut as well.

I don't really see anyone going past 20, but I do think 20 is a legitimate possibility for some or all. I have to believe that Slive had not only good information but good perspective due to his associations when he told the world we would probably move to "very, very large conferences" in the next wave.

I agree that 20 is the max.

What shape does it take?

The SEC will be the potter and the B12 clay....

The B12 will be on the auction block

Yes!

Well, if this all coincides with ESPN being in content acquisition mode then the SEC and ACC probably stand to bring down the biggest brands and perhaps the largest numbers.]The PAC is not in a very strong position and the B1G can pay well, but might be limited by a few factors.

Your PAC and B1G points are both true.

What about this?

SEC adds Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, South Florida, and BYU, TCU, and Baylor (the false football god$ will forgive its many sins like they did for Ped St...)

With 20 schools and 5 divisions of five, it's easy for the SEC to keep UT and A&M

This would be a huge issue for the SEC which is easily solved by putting both schools into separate divisions.

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, TCU, Baylor, and Tulane

B1G adds Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, and UConn

PAC adds Colorado State, New Mexico, UNLV, and Houston


Predictions?

If the PAC doesn't agree to sell ESPN a % of the PACN, I can see ESPN moving all the B12's Texas schools to the SEC; thus, the PACN continues to starve....

I've thought about ESPN doing that, but I think 1) A&M would have a conniption if their current advantages were so thoroughly neutralized and I can't really blame them. 2) I don't think ESPN would stick so many schools from one market into one conference because it would create a significant amount of leverage for that league.

There's probably a lot of different ways to do it, but let's say for a moment that some of these conferences act with a greater sense of independence and aren't really worried so much about getting a contract bump in the near future. What if they're more worried about changing the paradigm for the future and possibly putting the screws on the networks because they know just how valuable their content is?

I've argued before that college athletics is probably almost as valuable as the NFL, but they don't get paid like it. I think the main reason for that is because college athletics is very decentralized. Networks get to deal with multiple partners from different parts of the country and that drives the price down. The advent of new competitors on the network side has driven the price up a little, but not significantly. Eventually, the leagues will figure out that the more product they have under one roof the more they'll get paid.

My original idea for the "super conference" was for the SEC to absorb the entire Big 12, but I doubt anything quite like that happens. I do like the number 24 though as it brings in the possibility of dominating multiple regions of the country and therefore makes any league a must have property for the networks.
08-24-2017 08:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,355
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 670
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #16
RE: How large could these leagues get?
(08-24-2017 08:54 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(08-24-2017 09:30 AM)Underdog Wrote:  
(08-23-2017 11:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If you assume that G5 schools are on the table because they add unique audiences in a streaming world then how large could some of these leagues grow?

I've thought there's a good chance that the entire Big 12 could find a home in the next iteration of Power leagues and that possibly even a few G5s could make the cut as well.

I don't really see anyone going past 20, but I do think 20 is a legitimate possibility for some or all. I have to believe that Slive had not only good information but good perspective due to his associations when he told the world we would probably move to "very, very large conferences" in the next wave.

I agree that 20 is the max.

What shape does it take?

The SEC will be the potter and the B12 clay....

The B12 will be on the auction block

Yes!

Well, if this all coincides with ESPN being in content acquisition mode then the SEC and ACC probably stand to bring down the biggest brands and perhaps the largest numbers.]The PAC is not in a very strong position and the B1G can pay well, but might be limited by a few factors.

Your PAC and B1G points are both true.

What about this?

SEC adds Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, South Florida, and BYU, TCU, and Baylor (the false football god$ will forgive its many sins like they did for Ped St...)

With 20 schools and 5 divisions of five, it's easy for the SEC to keep UT and A&M

This would be a huge issue for the SEC which is easily solved by putting both schools into separate divisions.

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, TCU, Baylor, and Tulane

B1G adds Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, and UConn

PAC adds Colorado State, New Mexico, UNLV, and Houston


Predictions?

If the PAC doesn't agree to sell ESPN a % of the PACN, I can see ESPN moving all the B12's Texas schools to the SEC; thus, the PACN continues to starve....

I've thought about ESPN doing that, but I think 1) A&M would have a conniption if their current advantages were so thoroughly neutralized and I can't really blame them. 2) I don't think ESPN would stick so many schools from one market into one conference because it would create a significant amount of leverage for that league.

There's probably a lot of different ways to do it, but let's say for a moment that some of these conferences act with a greater sense of independence and aren't really worried so much about getting a contract bump in the near future. What if they're more worried about changing the paradigm for the future and possibly putting the screws on the networks because they know just how valuable their content is?

I've argued before that college athletics is probably almost as valuable as the NFL, but they don't get paid like it. I think the main reason for that is because college athletics is very decentralized. Networks get to deal with multiple partners from different parts of the country and that drives the price down. The advent of new competitors on the network side has driven the price up a little, but not significantly. Eventually, the leagues will figure out that the more product they have under one roof the more they'll get paid.

My original idea for the "super conference" was for the SEC to absorb the entire Big 12, but I doubt anything quite like that happens. I do like the number 24 though as it brings in the possibility of dominating multiple regions of the country and therefore makes any league a must have property for the networks.

Just remember than in the end 6 team division need to be able to function like small member conferences for travel, minor sports, rivalries, and to make sure that entrants into the conference semifinals represent each of the distinct viewing areas of that conference. So, keeping old friends and rivals together without having to take everyone is the preferred route to accomplishing the objective of keeping all of a conferences regions in play through the conference semis.
08-24-2017 09:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,647
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #17
RE: How large could these leagues get?
(08-24-2017 09:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-24-2017 08:54 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(08-24-2017 09:30 AM)Underdog Wrote:  
(08-23-2017 11:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If you assume that G5 schools are on the table because they add unique audiences in a streaming world then how large could some of these leagues grow?

I've thought there's a good chance that the entire Big 12 could find a home in the next iteration of Power leagues and that possibly even a few G5s could make the cut as well.

I don't really see anyone going past 20, but I do think 20 is a legitimate possibility for some or all. I have to believe that Slive had not only good information but good perspective due to his associations when he told the world we would probably move to "very, very large conferences" in the next wave.

I agree that 20 is the max.

What shape does it take?

The SEC will be the potter and the B12 clay....

The B12 will be on the auction block

Yes!

Well, if this all coincides with ESPN being in content acquisition mode then the SEC and ACC probably stand to bring down the biggest brands and perhaps the largest numbers.]The PAC is not in a very strong position and the B1G can pay well, but might be limited by a few factors.

Your PAC and B1G points are both true.

What about this?

SEC adds Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, South Florida, and BYU, TCU, and Baylor (the false football god$ will forgive its many sins like they did for Ped St...)

With 20 schools and 5 divisions of five, it's easy for the SEC to keep UT and A&M

This would be a huge issue for the SEC which is easily solved by putting both schools into separate divisions.

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, TCU, Baylor, and Tulane

B1G adds Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, and UConn

PAC adds Colorado State, New Mexico, UNLV, and Houston


Predictions?

If the PAC doesn't agree to sell ESPN a % of the PACN, I can see ESPN moving all the B12's Texas schools to the SEC; thus, the PACN continues to starve....

I've thought about ESPN doing that, but I think 1) A&M would have a conniption if their current advantages were so thoroughly neutralized and I can't really blame them. 2) I don't think ESPN would stick so many schools from one market into one conference because it would create a significant amount of leverage for that league.

There's probably a lot of different ways to do it, but let's say for a moment that some of these conferences act with a greater sense of independence and aren't really worried so much about getting a contract bump in the near future. What if they're more worried about changing the paradigm for the future and possibly putting the screws on the networks because they know just how valuable their content is?

I've argued before that college athletics is probably almost as valuable as the NFL, but they don't get paid like it. I think the main reason for that is because college athletics is very decentralized. Networks get to deal with multiple partners from different parts of the country and that drives the price down. The advent of new competitors on the network side has driven the price up a little, but not significantly. Eventually, the leagues will figure out that the more product they have under one roof the more they'll get paid.

My original idea for the "super conference" was for the SEC to absorb the entire Big 12, but I doubt anything quite like that happens. I do like the number 24 though as it brings in the possibility of dominating multiple regions of the country and therefore makes any league a must have property for the networks.

Just remember than in the end 6 team division need to be able to function like small member conferences for travel, minor sports, rivalries, and to make sure that entrants into the conference semifinals represent each of the distinct viewing areas of that conference. So, keeping old friends and rivals together without having to take everyone is the preferred route to accomplishing the objective of keeping all of a conferences regions in play through the conference semis.

It's probably best if those divisions represent regions rather than cross them, I would agree with that.

It sort of precludes the idea of taking top programs from multiple parts of the country as that would match too many schools with non-rivals or non-regional schools. It's one of the reasons I originally thought absorbing the Big 12 was best as it would simply be annexing another region of the country we had already tapped.

If I had to take 10 in the current environment to build a "super conference" then I might do something like this:

BYU, Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, West Virginia, East Carolina, Cincinnati
08-25-2017 12:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,355
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 670
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #18
RE: How large could these leagues get?
(08-25-2017 12:07 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(08-24-2017 09:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-24-2017 08:54 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(08-24-2017 09:30 AM)Underdog Wrote:  
(08-23-2017 11:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If you assume that G5 schools are on the table because they add unique audiences in a streaming world then how large could some of these leagues grow?

I've thought there's a good chance that the entire Big 12 could find a home in the next iteration of Power leagues and that possibly even a few G5s could make the cut as well.

I don't really see anyone going past 20, but I do think 20 is a legitimate possibility for some or all. I have to believe that Slive had not only good information but good perspective due to his associations when he told the world we would probably move to "very, very large conferences" in the next wave.

I agree that 20 is the max.

What shape does it take?

The SEC will be the potter and the B12 clay....

The B12 will be on the auction block

Yes!

Well, if this all coincides with ESPN being in content acquisition mode then the SEC and ACC probably stand to bring down the biggest brands and perhaps the largest numbers.]The PAC is not in a very strong position and the B1G can pay well, but might be limited by a few factors.

Your PAC and B1G points are both true.

What about this?

SEC adds Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, South Florida, and BYU, TCU, and Baylor (the false football god$ will forgive its many sins like they did for Ped St...)

With 20 schools and 5 divisions of five, it's easy for the SEC to keep UT and A&M

This would be a huge issue for the SEC which is easily solved by putting both schools into separate divisions.

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, TCU, Baylor, and Tulane

B1G adds Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, and UConn

PAC adds Colorado State, New Mexico, UNLV, and Houston


Predictions?

If the PAC doesn't agree to sell ESPN a % of the PACN, I can see ESPN moving all the B12's Texas schools to the SEC; thus, the PACN continues to starve....

I've thought about ESPN doing that, but I think 1) A&M would have a conniption if their current advantages were so thoroughly neutralized and I can't really blame them. 2) I don't think ESPN would stick so many schools from one market into one conference because it would create a significant amount of leverage for that league.

There's probably a lot of different ways to do it, but let's say for a moment that some of these conferences act with a greater sense of independence and aren't really worried so much about getting a contract bump in the near future. What if they're more worried about changing the paradigm for the future and possibly putting the screws on the networks because they know just how valuable their content is?

I've argued before that college athletics is probably almost as valuable as the NFL, but they don't get paid like it. I think the main reason for that is because college athletics is very decentralized. Networks get to deal with multiple partners from different parts of the country and that drives the price down. The advent of new competitors on the network side has driven the price up a little, but not significantly. Eventually, the leagues will figure out that the more product they have under one roof the more they'll get paid.

My original idea for the "super conference" was for the SEC to absorb the entire Big 12, but I doubt anything quite like that happens. I do like the number 24 though as it brings in the possibility of dominating multiple regions of the country and therefore makes any league a must have property for the networks.

Just remember than in the end 6 team division need to be able to function like small member conferences for travel, minor sports, rivalries, and to make sure that entrants into the conference semifinals represent each of the distinct viewing areas of that conference. So, keeping old friends and rivals together without having to take everyone is the preferred route to accomplishing the objective of keeping all of a conferences regions in play through the conference semis.

It's probably best if those divisions represent regions rather than cross them, I would agree with that.

It sort of precludes the idea of taking top programs from multiple parts of the country as that would match too many schools with non-rivals or non-regional schools. It's one of the reasons I originally thought absorbing the Big 12 was best as it would simply be annexing another region of the country we had already tapped.

If I had to take 10 in the current environment to build a "super conference" then I might do something like this:

BYU, Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, West Virginia, East Carolina, Cincinnati

We could go to 16 or 18 out of the Big 12, but if we go to 24 it will be out of the ACC and if we do that we don't need any Big 12 schools.

Here's what I have in mind:

B1G East: Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
B1G North: Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Wisconsin
B1G South: Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Nebraska, Northwestern, Utah
B1G West: California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

SEC East: Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
SEC North: Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech
SEC South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
SEC West: Arkansas, L.S.U., Louisville, Miami, Missouri, Texas A&M

B12 East: Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
B12 North: Cincinnati, Colorado State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, T.C.U.
B12 South: Arizona, Arizona State, Baylor, Houston, Texas, Texas Tech
B12 North: Brigham Young, Boise State, Nevada L.V., Oregon State, San Diego State, Washington State.
08-25-2017 12:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,531
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 306
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #19
How large could these leagues get?
JR, wouldn't it make more sense to swap Louisville & Kentucky? Kentucky has more history with the teams in your west division while Louisville has history with the teams in the north. It would also bring more football strength to the north. Conversely however, as a football fan, I would rather play LSU, Miami & A&M.

SEC North: Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech
SEC West: Arkansas, L.S.U., Kentucky, Miami, Missouri, Texas A&M


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(This post was last modified: 08-25-2017 08:21 AM by Lenvillecards.)
08-25-2017 08:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,355
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 670
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #20
RE: How large could these leagues get?
(08-25-2017 08:07 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  JR, wouldn't it make more sense to swap Louisville & Kentucky? Kentucky has more history with the teams in your west division while Louisville has history with the teams in the north. It would also bring more football strength to the north. Conversely however, as a football fan, I would rather play LSU, Miami & A&M.

SEC North: Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech
SEC West: Arkansas, L.S.U., Kentucky, Miami, Missouri, Texas A&M


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Either way works fine for me Lenville. My main thought was not to have all of the basketball powers together, but to try to keep football rivals together as much as possible. I thought having Florida recruiting access would be important to Louisville's football so that's why I placed them in that division with Miami.
08-25-2017 03:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.