The promotion/relegation idea from English soccer has never been able to be implemented in a practical way in the US, but is definitely marketable and adds excitement. My idea involves a partnership between the ACC and SEC.. two leagues that share a lot in common as far as geography and rivalries.
The SEC 16 and ACC 14 join forces as a singular entity when it comes to TV negotiations and then also form an 8-team “Premier League” and essentially form 3 conferences that have some fluidity in their specific members year over year.
The top 5 SEC teams + top 3 ACC teams form this 8 team premier league. That would still leave an 11-team SEC & 11 team ACC. The 8-team “Premier League”, the 11 Team SEC & 11 team ACC would operate as 3 separate conferences… all of which can still hold a lucrative CCG, earn a playoff spot or win a National Championship on any given year. It could be based on CFP rankings or a aggregate ranking over a few years to start, but would be subject to promotion/relegation moving forward. The 11-team SEC champion and 11-team ACC champion would be promoted to the “premier league” (in addition to being likely participants in the playoff as s top 6 conference champ), while the worst finishing SEC team and ACC team in the 8-team “premier” league would be relegated back to their typical home conference. Even the “relegated” teams would be participants in major Power CFB with a chance to win a title in theory, so it would not be a catastrophic thing to be “relegated.”
Since the “premier league” would only have a 7-game schedule, it would leave 2 games for a total 9-game conference schedule to make sure Alabama/Auburn, Florida/FSU, etc. still get played every season even if they happen to be separated between groupings in a given season.
This should be enough to bring ESPN back to the negotiation table. It could even be uneven revenue where the ACC and SEC gets similar or a bit more than they are slated to get already respectively, but the 8 promoted teams get paid a premium amount of revenue in the seasons they are promoted. It would give ESPN 8 of the top 15-20 teams in the country competing in a single division, 3 separate CCG & a ton of inventory for the SECN/ACCN. Not to mention games that have implications of promotion, relegation, CCG, playoffs, etc.
For the SEC it gets them access to schools like a Clemson and FSU under their umbrella a decade earlier than would have previously been possible, more revenue and top status in College athletics.
For the ACC, it gives the teams that are complaining about revenues at least a chance to increase their cut by being in the “premier league.” Clemson and FSU would qualify more years than not. Hopefully gets ESPN back to the table. also, the ACC and SEC networks could charge in State carriage rates across both footprints.
It would allow both conferences to keep traditional rivalries like Florida, FSU, Clemson/SC, Louisville/Ky, etc.
SEC schools would vote against it near unanimously. They're already in what's effectively the closest thing to the premier league today. This would demote 11 schools out of the top league, and 11 schools/fan bases will have to deal with entire seasons where they're not in this theoretical premier league every year -- which means depressed fan interest.
(06-02-2023 10:55 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote: [ -> ]SEC schools would vote against it near unanimously.
Maybe so & obviously this just a crazy idea, but say you are Alabama and right now you are getting the same as Vandy from the conference. What is a potential 8-team division or Alabama, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Clemson, Florida State and UNC playing a round robin in one season worth to Alabama? What is it worth to ESPN? What if those 8 team get $100 mil? Are they voting “No”? Think of the market share they’d have over the Big Ten. They’d own the East coast.
(06-02-2023 11:03 PM)KRoach11 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-02-2023 10:55 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote: [ -> ]SEC schools would vote against it near unanimously.
Maybe so & obviously this just a crazy idea, but say you are Alabama and right now you are getting the same as Vandy from the conference. What is a potential 8-team division or Alabama, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Clemson, Florida State and UNC playing a round robin in one season worth to Alabama? What is it worth to ESPN? What if those 8 team get $100 mil? Are they voting “No”? Think of the market share they’d have over the Big Ten. They’d own the East coast.
I still think a 1 loss team and certainly an undefeated ACC or SEC team gets a playoff spot. Why wouldn’t they? This isn’t like a premier league getting relegated to a second league. It would still be a major power conference.
(06-02-2023 11:03 PM)KRoach11 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-02-2023 10:55 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote: [ -> ]SEC schools would vote against it near unanimously.
Maybe so & obviously this just a crazy idea, but say you are Alabama and right now you are getting the same as Vandy from the conference. What is a potential 8-team division or Alabama, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Clemson, Florida State and UNC playing a round robin in one season worth to Alabama? What is it worth to ESPN? What if those 8 team get $100 mil? Are they voting “No”? Think of the market share they’d have over the Big Ten. They’d own the East coast.
You'd need more than 8 SEC votes - that's only 50% of the conference. And those 8 votes are unlikely because today everyone in the SEC is
guaranteed to spend every season in the top conference. Under this format, multiple bluebloods would be at risk of having to spend a season (or more) in the "minor league" SEC.
You can't put a price on certainty.
No SEC ORACC school would ever even consider looking at Pro/Rel, let alone vote for it.
/Drops Mic.
(06-02-2023 11:07 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote: [ -> ] (06-02-2023 11:03 PM)KRoach11 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-02-2023 10:55 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote: [ -> ]SEC schools would vote against it near unanimously.
Maybe so & obviously this just a crazy idea, but say you are Alabama and right now you are getting the same as Vandy from the conference. What is a potential 8-team division or Alabama, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Clemson, Florida State and UNC playing a round robin in one season worth to Alabama? What is it worth to ESPN? What if those 8 team get $100 mil? Are they voting “No”? Think of the market share they’d have over the Big Ten. They’d own the East coast.
You'd need more than 8 SEC votes - that's only 50% of the conference. And those 8 votes are unlikely because today everyone in the SEC is guaranteed to spend every season in the top conference. Under this format, multiple bluebloods would be at risk of having to spend a season (or more) in the "minor league" SEC.
You can't put a price on certainty.
I agree SEC would be the top hurdle and there would surely be some NCAA hurdles as well, but I’m operating under the theory that the SEC teams/ACC teams make no less and probably more with the ACC/SEC network gains at minimum, with the chance to make a premium in the seasons they happen to be upgraded. If any team has the risk to make less money than they are currently slated to make the idea is a non-starter. The question is what something like this would be worth to ESPN? I think a regular merger couldn’t happen for the reasons you are saying. ESPN isn’t paying more for a grouping of schools the already have under their purview & SEC isn’t going to water down their league.
I think my idea is additive in terms or market value though.
(06-02-2023 11:14 PM)Rube Dali Wrote: [ -> ]No SEC ORACC school would ever even consider looking at Pro/Rel, let alone vote for it.
/Drops Mic.
Why? If the “relegation” is the status quo what is the risk? It is not being relegated to a second tier league.
I’m normally pretty open about expansion topics and I take the approach that if you’re interested in a thread, post on it, if you aren’t ignore it. The one thing that drives me nuts are promotion/relegation threads. These are never going to happen. There’s no sense in taking up server space with these futile discussions.
(06-02-2023 10:18 PM)KRoach11 Wrote: [ -> ]The promotion/relegation idea from English soccer has never been able to be implemented in a practical way in the US, but is definitely marketable and adds excitement. My idea involves a partnership between the ACC and SEC.. two leagues that share a lot in common as far as geography and rivalries.
The SEC 16 and ACC 14 join forces as a singular entity when it comes to TV negotiations and then also form an 8-team “Premier League” and essentially form 3 conferences that have some fluidity in their specific members year over year.
The top 5 SEC teams + top 3 ACC teams form this 8 team premier league. That would still leave an 11-team SEC & 11 team ACC. The 8-team “Premier League”, the 11 Team SEC & 11 team ACC would operate as 3 separate conferences… all of which can still hold a lucrative CCG, earn a playoff spot or win a National Championship on any given year. It could be based on CFP rankings or a aggregate ranking over a few years to start, but would be subject to promotion/relegation moving forward. The 11-team SEC champion and 11-team ACC champion would be promoted to the “premier league” (in addition to being likely participants in the playoff as s top 6 conference champ), while the worst finishing SEC team and ACC team in the 8-team “premier” league would be relegated back to their typical home conference. Even the “relegated” teams would be participants in major Power CFB with a chance to win a title in theory, so it would not be a catastrophic thing to be “relegated.”
Since the “premier league” would only have a 7-game schedule, it would leave 2 games for a total 9-game conference schedule to make sure Alabama/Auburn, Florida/FSU, etc. still get played every season even if they happen to be separated between groupings in a given season.
This should be enough to bring ESPN back to the negotiation table. It could even be uneven revenue where the ACC and SEC gets similar or a bit more than they are slated to get already respectively, but the 8 promoted teams get paid a premium amount of revenue in the seasons they are promoted. It would give ESPN 8 of the top 15-20 teams in the country competing in a single division, 3 separate CCG & a ton of inventory for the SECN/ACCN. Not to mention games that have implications of promotion, relegation, CCG, playoffs, etc.
For the SEC it gets them access to schools like a Clemson and FSU under their umbrella a decade earlier than would have previously been possible, more revenue and top status in College athletics.
For the ACC, it gives the teams that are complaining about revenues at least a chance to increase their cut by being in the “premier league.” Clemson and FSU would qualify more years than not. Hopefully gets ESPN back to the table. also, the ACC and SEC networks could charge in State carriage rates across both footprints.
It would allow both conferences to keep traditional rivalries like Florida, FSU, Clemson/SC, Louisville/Ky, etc.
The way pro/rel developed in English League was that the first division existed, and they invited a bunch of teams to join the league but form a second division. The better teams could promote into the first division. So they didn't have to select which teams would move into the first division, nor automatically relegate teams to the second division.
You would also want more teams in the premier division.
So have a 16-team premiership, initially formed from the SEC, and a 14-team First Division initially formed from the ACC.
Schedule based on balancing SOS, and scheduling rivalries, and experiencing teams:
Divide premiership into four groups of four based on performance over the previous seasons. Schedule three games within their own group, and two games against each other group. When scheduling games, give preference to rivalry games, then games that have not been played recently.
IMO the SEC would never go for this. No SEC school is going to risk being relegated to a lower status than other SEC schools for the IMO very lukewarm benefits of gaining access to UNC and FSU and Clemson, schools they might want (in the case of UNC, definitely want) but can easily live without. And IMO the SEC already has top status in college athletics.
The SEC, IMO, has no interest in any kind of partnership or merger with the ACC. When the time comes, maybe not for 10 more years, it will be happy to strip the top of the ACC for parts, and that is it.
(06-03-2023 06:40 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]I’m normally pretty open about expansion topics and I take the approach that if you’re interested in a thread, post on it, if you aren’t ignore it. The one thing that drives me nuts are promotion/relegation threads. These are never going to happen. There’s no sense in taking up server space with these futile discussions.
Just like UCONN joining a P5 without football.
(06-02-2023 10:18 PM)KRoach11 Wrote: [ -> ]The promotion/relegation idea from English soccer has never been able to be implemented in a practical way in the US, but is definitely marketable and adds excitement. My idea involves a partnership between the ACC and SEC.. two leagues that share a lot in common as far as geography and rivalries.
The SEC 16 and ACC 14 join forces as a singular entity when it comes to TV negotiations and then also form an 8-team “Premier League” and essentially form 3 conferences that have some fluidity in their specific members year over year.
The top 5 SEC teams + top 3 ACC teams form this 8 team premier league. That would still leave an 11-team SEC & 11 team ACC. The 8-team “Premier League”, the 11 Team SEC & 11 team ACC would operate as 3 separate conferences… all of which can still hold a lucrative CCG, earn a playoff spot or win a National Championship on any given year. It could be based on CFP rankings or a aggregate ranking over a few years to start, but would be subject to promotion/relegation moving forward. The 11-team SEC champion and 11-team ACC champion would be promoted to the “premier league” (in addition to being likely participants in the playoff as s top 6 conference champ), while the worst finishing SEC team and ACC team in the 8-team “premier” league would be relegated back to their typical home conference. Even the “relegated” teams would be participants in major Power CFB with a chance to win a title in theory, so it would not be a catastrophic thing to be “relegated.”
Since the “premier league” would only have a 7-game schedule, it would leave 2 games for a total 9-game conference schedule to make sure Alabama/Auburn, Florida/FSU, etc. still get played every season even if they happen to be separated between groupings in a given season.
This should be enough to bring ESPN back to the negotiation table. It could even be uneven revenue where the ACC and SEC gets similar or a bit more than they are slated to get already respectively, but the 8 promoted teams get paid a premium amount of revenue in the seasons they are promoted. It would give ESPN 8 of the top 15-20 teams in the country competing in a single division, 3 separate CCG & a ton of inventory for the SECN/ACCN. Not to mention games that have implications of promotion, relegation, CCG, playoffs, etc.
For the SEC it gets them access to schools like a Clemson and FSU under their umbrella a decade earlier than would have previously been possible, more revenue and top status in College athletics.
For the ACC, it gives the teams that are complaining about revenues at least a chance to increase their cut by being in the “premier league.” Clemson and FSU would qualify more years than not. Hopefully gets ESPN back to the table. also, the ACC and SEC networks could charge in State carriage rates across both footprints.
It would allow both conferences to keep traditional rivalries like Florida, FSU, Clemson/SC, Louisville/Ky, etc.
WOW! Could be a game changer! WOW...just...WOW
(06-03-2023 10:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]IMO the SEC would never go for this. No SEC school is going to risk being relegated to a lower status than other SEC schools for the IMO very lukewarm benefits of gaining access to UNC and FSU and Clemson, schools they might want (in the case of UNC, definitely want) but can easily live without. And IMO the SEC already has top status in college athletics.
The SEC, IMO, has no interest in any kind of partnership or merger with the ACC. When the time comes, maybe not for 10 more years, it will be happy to strip the top of the ACC for parts, and that is it.
If ESPN is paying for it, I bet they would!
(06-03-2023 11:21 AM)GTFletch Wrote: [ -> ] (06-03-2023 10:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]IMO the SEC would never go for this. No SEC school is going to risk being relegated to a lower status than other SEC schools for the IMO very lukewarm benefits of gaining access to UNC and FSU and Clemson, schools they might want (in the case of UNC, definitely want) but can easily live without. And IMO the SEC already has top status in college athletics.
The SEC, IMO, has no interest in any kind of partnership or merger with the ACC. When the time comes, maybe not for 10 more years, it will be happy to strip the top of the ACC for parts, and that is it.
If ESPN is paying for it, I bet they would!
You may be right, as money obviously matters greatly.
But IMO the SEC would be unwise to do these kinds of things even if ESPN was paying more. Better to keep the culture of the conference than grab extra money. There's a reason the Southern Conference dissolved 90 years ago.
And as an aside, I very much doubt ESPN would pay for it. Why would they want to pay low-value ACC schools a lot more money? IIRC, Disney is already in a kind of retrenchment mode, with recent layoffs and ongoing streaming losses.
They don't seem willing to pay the SEC more per school for having added Oklahoma and Texas, two undeniable blue chips.
(06-03-2023 06:40 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]I’m normally pretty open about expansion topics and I take the approach that if you’re interested in a thread, post on it, if you aren’t ignore it. The one thing that drives me nuts are promotion/relegation threads. These are never going to happen. There’s no sense in taking up server space with these futile discussions.
Lol… I’m sure we are good on server space
Something like this would definitely generate better regular season media ratings. ESPN would benefit and pay for this type of collaboration.
Given the ACC’s move to unequal revenue sharing, ACC schools are likely favorable to this form of tiering (based on performance).
The SEC would be tougher sell. SEC schools aren’t desperate for media revenue. Lower performing schools (such as Vandy, Kentucky, etc.) have no incentive to open the door for further unequal revenue distribution. This idea may have to wait a few years.
(06-03-2023 08:31 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote: [ -> ]Something like this would definitely generate better regular season media ratings. ESPN would benefit and pay for this type of collaboration.
Given the ACC’s move to unequal revenue sharing, ACC schools are likely favorable to this form of tiering (based on performance).
The SEC would be tougher sell. SEC schools aren’t desperate for media revenue. Lower performing schools (such as Vandy, Kentucky, etc.) have no incentive to open the door for further unequal revenue distribution. This idea may have to wait a few years.
No doubt. Would be a very tough sell to a middle or lower tier SEC school. Maybe an easier path would be the benefit.
(06-03-2023 08:41 PM)KRoach11 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-03-2023 08:31 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote: [ -> ]Something like this would definitely generate better regular season media ratings. ESPN would benefit and pay for this type of collaboration.
Given the ACC’s move to unequal revenue sharing, ACC schools are likely favorable to this form of tiering (based on performance).
The SEC would be tougher sell. SEC schools aren’t desperate for media revenue. Lower performing schools (such as Vandy, Kentucky, etc.) have no incentive to open the door for further unequal revenue distribution. This idea may have to wait a few years.
No doubt. Would be a very tough sell to a middle or lower tier SEC school. Maybe an easier path would be the benefit.
Some suggestions on how to market and/or improve this proposal…
1) Don’t call the plan promotion & relegation - too many fixate on downside risk. No one will ever support a venture that has their school potentially being relegated. Schools can only be promoted to a more difficult regular season schedule that results in higher payouts. An alternative is to rebrand the difficult schedule as a Champions League.
2) Allow Champions League (CL) participants to simultaneously compete in their core (ACC & SEC) conferences - assuming 5 SEC & 3 ACC teams are in the Champions League, then the League’s regular season could be 6 games per team. League games against conference foes would count in both standings. The Champions League participants would have to play 10 quality annual games (for SEC teams - 4 vs SEC only, 4 vs SEC & CL foes, and 2 vs ACC & CL foes; for ACC teams - 4 vs ACC only, 2 vs ACC & CL foes, and 4 vs SEC only). Best winning percentage determines championship game participants. The point is to create incremental media value and allow the participants to eat-what-they-kill (I.e., get paid more by ESPN).
3) Earning a bid into the championship game of their core conference pre-empts the CL playoff game.
Here's how a hypothetical ESPN, ACC, and SEC meeting would go,
ESPN: Hey guys, we were wondering if you were interested about our merging the two leagues and implementing promotion and regu....
ACC and SEC(in unison): GET OUT! GET OUT! GET OUT!
ACC and SEC: We'll see you never renew with us again!