Looking at a map, there are 17 states with no State schools in the P5:
ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, DE, ND, SD, MT, ID, WY, NM, NV, AK, HI
If the P5 becomes the P2, there’s several states whose flagships and/or land grants could fall out of those ranks:
WA, OR, CA, AZ, UT, CO, KS, IA, OK, WV, NC, GA (I’ll give KY (L’ville) and GA (GT) honorable mention—I don’t think they meet the definition but they are both big state schools)
Could this result in political pressure to get involved in regulating college athletics?
(08-03-2022 06:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]Looking at a map, there are 17 states with no State schools in the P5:
ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, DE, ND, SD, MT, ID, WY, NM, NV, AK, HI
If the P5 becomes the P2, there’s several states whose flagships and/or land grants could fall out of those ranks:
WA, OR, CA, AZ, UT, CO, KS, IA, OK, WV, NC, GA (I’ll give KY (L’ville) and GA (GT) honorable mention—I don’t think they meet the definition but they are both big state schools)
Could this result in political pressure to get involved in regulating college athletics?
It would be on a state-by-state basis and an internal fight, if anything. Maine, New Hampshire and Delaware aren't going to band together and convince the Federal Govt (or whoever) to force the B1G to invite schools from their states. You missed FL... UF for instance, is just a big piece of pie in FL now...there are more fans, politicians and schools "against" them than who support them. It's nothing like your situation in OH where OSU is the giant fish among mostly minnows. FL is just way to big and there's too many big, powerful schools for any one school to sit alone in the catbird seat for long. Heck UF isn't the oldest school (FSU, tangibly) or have the largest enrollment (UCF). UF's the highest rated and lone AAU (probably not for long) but it's not enough.
Anyway, as far as a bunch of "non-college football" states banding together to force change...highly doubt it.
(08-03-2022 07:19 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote: [ -> ] (08-03-2022 06:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]Looking at a map, there are 17 states with no State schools in the P5:
ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, DE, ND, SD, MT, ID, WY, NM, NV, AK, HI
If the P5 becomes the P2, there’s several states whose flagships and/or land grants could fall out of those ranks:
WA, OR, CA, AZ, UT, CO, KS, IA, OK, WV, NC, GA (I’ll give KY (L’ville) and GA (GT) honorable mention—I don’t think they meet the definition but they are both big state schools)
Could this result in political pressure to get involved in regulating college athletics?
It would be on a state-by-state basis and an internal fight, if anything. Maine, New Hampshire and Delaware aren't going to band together and convince the Federal Govt (or whoever) to force the B1G to invite schools from their states. You missed FL... UF for instance, is just a big piece of pie in FL now...there are more fans, politicians and schools "against" them than who support them. It's nothing like your situation in OH where OSU is the giant fish among mostly minnows. FL is just way to big and there's too many big, powerful schools for any one school to sit alone in the catbird seat for long. Heck UF isn't the oldest school (FSU, tangibly) or have the largest enrollment (UCF). UF's the highest rated and lone AAU (probably not for long) but it's not enough.
Anyway, as far as a bunch of "non-college football" states banding together to force change...highly doubt it.
Orrin Hatch raised a stink (Senator from Utah) and soon enough, Utah gets into the club.
If the split happens, and it is too exclusive (or if the split includes basketball), yes, politicians will get involved.
(08-03-2022 06:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]Looking at a map, there are 17 states with no State schools in the P5:
ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, DE, ND, SD, MT, ID, WY, NM, NV, AK, HI
If the P5 becomes the P2, there’s several states whose flagships and/or land grants could fall out of those ranks:
WA, OR, CA, AZ, UT, CO, KS, IA, OK, WV, NC, GA (I’ll give KY (L’ville) and GA (GT) honorable mention—I don’t think they meet the definition but they are both big state schools)
Could this result in political pressure to get involved in regulating college athletics?
So long as BC is in the club, I don't think anyone would care much unless it resulted in UMass never being able to
play in the FBS.
If BC gets left behind as well, that might result in something. UMass hasn't been at FBS for all that long, but BC had been there as the sole one for quite some time/
Other than some grandstanding for their particular base, I don't think so.
College football TV contracts and realignment are not that high of a national priority.
(08-03-2022 06:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]Looking at a map, there are 17 states with no State schools in the P5:
ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, DE, ND, SD, MT, ID, WY, NM, NV, AK, HI
If the P5 becomes the P2, there’s several states whose flagships and/or land grants could fall out of those ranks:
WA, OR, CA, AZ, UT, CO, KS, IA, OK, WV, NC, GA (I’ll give KY (L’ville) and GA (GT) honorable mention—I don’t think they meet the definition but they are both big state schools)
Could this result in political pressure to get involved in regulating college athletics?
None of those states on your first list are significant except for MA and NY and they have BC and Syracuse.
CT, NY since Syracuse is private and not state run, ID, NM, NV, HI, WA, OR, AZ, UT, CO, KS,WV, NC will start screaming. A lot of the politicians these days are not from these large Universities that are going to the P2. If they do get enough complaints? They will get involved to through antitrust suits against the P2.
I left California off since UCLA is going to the P2.
I left IA off because of Iowa.
I left OK off because Oklahoma is going to SEC.
I left GA off because Georgia is already in SEC.
(08-03-2022 06:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]Looking at a map, there are 17 states with no State schools in the P5:
ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, DE, ND, SD, MT, ID, WY, NM, NV, AK, HI
If the P5 becomes the P2, there’s several states whose flagships and/or land grants could fall out of those ranks:
WA, OR, CA, AZ, UT, CO, KS, IA, OK, WV, NC, GA (I’ll give KY (L’ville) and GA (GT) honorable mention—I don’t think they meet the definition but they are both big state schools)
Could this result in political pressure to get involved in regulating college athletics?
Actually I concur with the general premise you stated. However, politicians will get involved in behalf of certain schools being excluded. Mitch McConnell, for example, will make a fuss if Louisville is not included.
Not every state needs a “power” school, and some have neither the desire or preferred resources to invest in such.