(01-20-2014 03:59 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:09 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Why should a program like UConn, with a larger budget and fan base than some P5 members accept permanent second tier status by going along with a plan for a separate G5 champion? Obviously, I would just like to see UConn included at the highest level of competition, where it belongs, but if no conference will have us there is no way we should agree to any sort of permanent lower status.

UCONN just like that old song, is going to have to learn, "Love The One Your with".

Does the song end with "...until you kick them to the curb when you find someone better"?



But I'm a realist and all-in on the AAC. We're going to be here for a while so we might as well make the best of it.

(01-20-2014 03:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:09 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Why should a program like UConn, with a larger budget and fan base than some P5 members accept permanent second tier status by going along with a plan for a separate G5 champion? Obviously, I would just like to see UConn included at the highest level of competition, where it belongs, but if no conference will have us there is no way we should agree to any sort of permanent lower status.

I don't think you will have to. P5 realignment isn't over and the need for new state markets has not yet been sated. It's just time for Husky fans along with about 6 other schools' fans to be patient. You might not have been anyone's first or second choice in this line of realignment but your market, your state school status, your academics, and your basketball will all become more attractive as the final selections are made.

Just curious, what incentive is there to expand at this point? I'm just not seeing how these meetings have much of anything to do with expansion. Granted, I stopped giving a crap, comparatively speaking.

(01-20-2014 04:15 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:09 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Why should a program like UConn, with a larger budget and fan base than some P5 members accept permanent second tier status by going along with a plan for a separate G5 champion? Obviously, I would just like to see UConn included at the highest level of competition, where it belongs, but if no conference will have us there is no way we should agree to any sort of permanent lower status.

I don't think you will have to. P5 realignment isn't over and the need for new state markets has not yet been sated. It's just time for Husky fans along with about 6 other schools' fans to be patient. You might not have been anyone's first or second choice in this line of realignment but your market, your state school status, your academics, and your basketball will all become more attractive as the final selections are made.

Just curious, what incentive is there to expand at this point? I'm just not seeing how these meetings have much of anything to do with expansion. Granted, I stopped giving a crap, comparatively speaking.

Only if the P5 are told it will make each member more money to expand.

The P5 already had some limited autonomy. Prior to the last couple of years realignment, the AQ6 had 18 of the 27 votes on football matters and 18 of 51 total in one of the councils. (3 votes for each of the AQ6, 3 for CUSA, 1.5 for the other 4-WAC used to have 3 but got 1.5 when it split).

I'm not hearing how anything proposed is significantly different than that, just some tweaking.

(01-20-2014 04:15 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:09 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Why should a program like UConn, with a larger budget and fan base than some P5 members accept permanent second tier status by going along with a plan for a separate G5 champion? Obviously, I would just like to see UConn included at the highest level of competition, where it belongs, but if no conference will have us there is no way we should agree to any sort of permanent lower status.

I don't think you will have to. P5 realignment isn't over and the need for new state markets has not yet been sated. It's just time for Husky fans along with about 6 other schools' fans to be patient. You might not have been anyone's first or second choice in this line of realignment but your market, your state school status, your academics, and your basketball will all become more attractive as the final selections are made.

Just curious, what incentive is there to expand at this point? I'm just not seeing how these meetings have much of anything to do with expansion. Granted, I stopped giving a crap, comparatively speaking.

1. Conferences with networks need more content and more market exposure. It is a beast that is going to have to be fed.

2. Structure means that some kind of move to a P4 is going to come at some time. The most likely target would be the Big 12. There aren't enough prizes in the Big 12 to satisfy the PAC/SEC/Big10 all at the same time. UConn could slide in under the right kind of distribution.

3. If the Big 12 decides to survive they will need to expand.

4. The incentive to move to a P4 is that the division of the 5th share of playoff money among the remaining power conferences coupled with mutual expansion to 16 would net each team participating in each of the remaining 4 conferences another 1.5 million per team per year in addition to making a playoff structure even easier to design.

5. Conferences with 14 teams need two more to make scheduling easy and equitable.

So this conference and its garbage notwithstanding there are still many varied reasons for realignment to continue. I also think that eventually to absorb those schools which might meet upper tier criteria and which might comprise a good grouping to bring a lawsuit for exclusionary practices the best solution is just to absorb them. Considering that some of them bring in niche markets or new states is the incentive, if the networks are willing to pay. 4 x 18 accommodates 72 schools, allows for internal playoffs for the surviving P4 conferences, and keeps more teams involved deeper into the season by permitting 3 divisional champions and 1 wild card per conference into the conference championship round of play.

So all of the above still has the potential to garner more revenue. And in addition to all of that having 18 schools helps to keep expansion from getting too top heavy.

It will also be the best bet for East Carolina, South Florida, or Central Florida to move into the P4. Regional fit will be important. Such a move does at lest put you into the conversation. The rest depends on how the eligible teams are divided.

(01-20-2014 03:59 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:09 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Why should a program like UConn, with a larger budget and fan base than some P5 members accept permanent second tier status by going along with a plan for a separate G5 champion? Obviously, I would just like to see UConn included at the highest level of competition, where it belongs, but if no conference will have us there is no way we should agree to any sort of permanent lower status.

UCONN just like that old song, is going to have to learn, "Love The One Your with".

I can live with being in the AAC. It would be unacceptable for the P5 to exclude UConn and the State of Connecticut from participation at the highest level of college athletics though based solely on conference affiliation. If an institution has the resources and support that P5 member schools do, there is no way that a permanent second tier status can be imposed on that institution.

(01-20-2014 04:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:15 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:09 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Why should a program like UConn, with a larger budget and fan base than some P5 members accept permanent second tier status by going along with a plan for a separate G5 champion? Obviously, I would just like to see UConn included at the highest level of competition, where it belongs, but if no conference will have us there is no way we should agree to any sort of permanent lower status.

I don't think you will have to. P5 realignment isn't over and the need for new state markets has not yet been sated. It's just time for Husky fans along with about 6 other schools' fans to be patient. You might not have been anyone's first or second choice in this line of realignment but your market, your state school status, your academics, and your basketball will all become more attractive as the final selections are made.

Just curious, what incentive is there to expand at this point? I'm just not seeing how these meetings have much of anything to do with expansion. Granted, I stopped giving a crap, comparatively speaking.

1. Conferences with networks need more content and more market exposure. It is a beast that is going to have to be fed.

2. Structure means that some kind of move to a P4 is going to come at some time. The most likely target would be the Big 12. There aren't enough prizes in the Big 12 to satisfy the PAC/SEC/Big10 all at the same time. UConn could slide in under the right kind of distribution.

3. If the Big 12 decides to survive they will need to expand.

4. The incentive to move to a P4 is that the division of the 5th share of playoff money among the remaining power conferences coupled with mutual expansion to 16 would net each team participating in each of the remaining 4 conferences another 1.5 million per team per year in addition to making a playoff structure even easier to design.

5. Conferences with 14 teams need two more to make scheduling easy and equitable.

So this conference and its garbage notwithstanding there are still many varied reasons for realignment to continue. I also think that eventually to absorb those schools which might meet upper tier criteria and which might comprise a good grouping to bring a lawsuit for exclusionary practices the best solution is just to absorb them. Considering that some of them bring in niche markets or new states is the incentive, if the networks are willing to pay. 4 x 18 accommodates 72 schools, allows for internal playoffs for the surviving P4 conferences, and keeps more teams involved deeper into the season by permitting 3 divisional champions and 1 wild card per conference into the conference championship round of play.

So all of the above still has the potential to garner more revenue. And in addition to all of that having 18 schools helps to keep expansion from getting too top heavy.

It will also be the best bet for East Carolina, South Florida, or Central Florida to move into the P4. Regional fit will be important. Such a move does at lest put you into the conversation. The rest depends on how the eligible teams are divided.

So we're basically making more assumptions here?

One possible solution is to pay the new comers to the P5,a smaller share of the T.V. revenue, based on what's commensurate with their contributuon to overall market share and viability to thier respective conference. Example: instead if each current conference member is making 20 million per, maybe the newcomer school only gets 10 million or whatever amount is decided based on some formula. They continue to get this initial amount and it can grow each year based on aformentioned formula until they can reach full share after 6 to 12 year period depending how their TV viewership and home game attendance grows within their market.If they can never reach full share they will be just stuck at the share they are deserving of, based on the formula.

(01-20-2014 04:51 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  One possible solution is to pay the new comers to the P5,a smaller share of the T.V. revenue, based on what's commensurate with their contributuon to overall market share and viability to thier respective conference. Example: instead if each current conference member is making 20 million per, maybe the newcomer school only gets 10 million or whatever amount is decided based on some formula. They continue to get this initial amount and it can grow each year based on aformentioned formula until they can reach full share after 6 to 12 year period depending how their TV viewership and home game attendance grows within their market.If they can never reach full share they will be just stuck at the share they are deserving of, based on the formula.

That's an interesting idea.

1. Conferences with networks need more content and more market exposure. It is a beast that is going to have to be fed.

If you already have 3 football games on Saturday and you are getting 8-10 basketball games per team with 14, they don't need more content. As for market exposure for a network, you have to get a team in a state larger than your average and that team has to be able to carry that state. So basically no one outside North Carolina, Virginia or Texas makes sense for the 14 team conferences to expand (at least with regards to their conference network). And no one outside of Texas makes sense for the Pac 12. So unless UT, UNC or UVA decide they want to move, nothing can happen.

(01-20-2014 04:49 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 04:15 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 03:09 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Why should a program like UConn, with a larger budget and fan base than some P5 members accept permanent second tier status by going along with a plan for a separate G5 champion? Obviously, I would just like to see UConn included at the highest level of competition, where it belongs, but if no conference will have us there is no way we should agree to any sort of permanent lower status.

I don't think you will have to. P5 realignment isn't over and the need for new state markets has not yet been sated. It's just time for Husky fans along with about 6 other schools' fans to be patient. You might not have been anyone's first or second choice in this line of realignment but your market, your state school status, your academics, and your basketball will all become more attractive as the final selections are made.

Just curious, what incentive is there to expand at this point? I'm just not seeing how these meetings have much of anything to do with expansion. Granted, I stopped giving a crap, comparatively speaking.

1. Conferences with networks need more content and more market exposure. It is a beast that is going to have to be fed.

2. Structure means that some kind of move to a P4 is going to come at some time. The most likely target would be the Big 12. There aren't enough prizes in the Big 12 to satisfy the PAC/SEC/Big10 all at the same time. UConn could slide in under the right kind of distribution.

3. If the Big 12 decides to survive they will need to expand.

4. The incentive to move to a P4 is that the division of the 5th share of playoff money among the remaining power conferences coupled with mutual expansion to 16 would net each team participating in each of the remaining 4 conferences another 1.5 million per team per year in addition to making a playoff structure even easier to design.

5. Conferences with 14 teams need two more to make scheduling easy and equitable.

So this conference and its garbage notwithstanding there are still many varied reasons for realignment to continue. I also think that eventually to absorb those schools which might meet upper tier criteria and which might comprise a good grouping to bring a lawsuit for exclusionary practices the best solution is just to absorb them. Considering that some of them bring in niche markets or new states is the incentive, if the networks are willing to pay. 4 x 18 accommodates 72 schools, allows for internal playoffs for the surviving P4 conferences, and keeps more teams involved deeper into the season by permitting 3 divisional champions and 1 wild card per conference into the conference championship round of play.

So all of the above still has the potential to garner more revenue. And in addition to all of that having 18 schools helps to keep expansion from getting too top heavy.

It will also be the best bet for East Carolina, South Florida, or Central Florida to move into the P4. Regional fit will be important. Such a move does at lest put you into the conversation. The rest depends on how the eligible teams are divided.

So we're basically making more assumptions here?

The first five are not really assumptions. Several of them are practically necessities. It's not done. Everyone has just been waiting to see what would come of the meetings, whether the largess to alter structure would permit the ease of further growth is a matter to be determined. But network content and ease of schedule and the need for additional markets are all important issues yet to be resolved.

I know what you mean JR.... that is if we look at this in a vacuum as if there's going to be a clean split of the P5 from the NCAA. At this point, after the CFP has been signed off on for the next 10 years or whatever it is, TV deals are set for roughly the same amount of time, etc.... I just don't see a need to expand. A clean P5 break from the NCAA seems like it'd be an absolute nightmare for the P5 at this point. As if they need any more negative PR.

Your list just of "reasons for expansion" doesn't make a lot of sense to discuss right now. When the CFP and all the TV deals run it's course, then yeah, maybe we talk about a major reshuffling of the deck again. Even then, that time period to run out those contracts is an eternity for developing technologies and how entertainment is distributed.

(01-20-2014 06:04 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Your list just of "reasons for expansion" doesn't make a lot of sense to discuss right now. When the CFP and all the TV deals run it's course, then yeah, maybe we talk about a major reshuffling of the deck again. Even then, that time period to run out those contracts is an eternity for developing technologies and how entertainment is distributed.

Actually a breakaway would be the best thing that could happen. Insanity is staying in the NCAA and trying to make a bloated out of touch bureaucracy try to work. It's easier to make the break. The CFP and the new contracts don't mean a danged thing. They were signed with NCAA teams. New contracts would be needed for all making the break. The CFP wants the best teams and are banking on it. They would sign a new deal in a heartbeat, especially if they didn't have to work within the morass of NCAA regulations.

The best thing the G5 could do is breakaway with us.

If you are splitting it 65 ways, it doesn't matter much how many conferences you have. Its a zero sum game whether you have 4 or 5. Now to some extent the Big 12 and Pac 12 schools would get less. That, of course, reduces their incentive to expand or move. For the other 3, its only about 300k a year/school on the playoff money. $50 million/14 vs. 62.5 million/16.

4X16 is nice and neat, but the world is messy.

(01-20-2014 06:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  If you are splitting it 65 ways, it doesn't matter much how many conferences you have. Its a zero sum game whether you have 4 or 5. Now to some extent the Big 12 and Pac 12 schools would get less. That, of course, reduces their incentive to expand or move. For the other 3, its only about 300k a year/school on the playoff money. $50 million/14 vs. 62.5 million/16.

4X16 is nice and neat, but the world is messy.

There are other bowl game tie ins that add revenue, then there is the matter of eliminating the 5th wheel which guarantees each remaining conference an in and the division of revenue is increasing each conference's share by 1/4 of 1/5. It is not a division among 65 teams. And then there is the eliminated conference's share. If that was the Big 12 then the 11th share belonging to the conference is parsed as well. What the Playoff money pays out is not exactly what is divided among the conference's respective teams. And then there is the added market value that the parsed teams bring to their new conferences. So it's more than simple division.

(01-20-2014 06:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 06:04 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Your list just of "reasons for expansion" doesn't make a lot of sense to discuss right now. When the CFP and all the TV deals run it's course, then yeah, maybe we talk about a major reshuffling of the deck again. Even then, that time period to run out those contracts is an eternity for developing technologies and how entertainment is distributed.

Actually a breakaway would be the best thing that could happen. Insanity is staying in the NCAA and trying to make a bloated out of touch bureaucracy try to work. It's easier to make the break. The CFP and the new contracts don't mean a danged thing. They were signed with NCAA teams. New contracts would be needed for all making the break. The CFP wants the best teams and are banking on it. They would sign a new deal in a heartbeat, especially if they didn't have to work within the morass of NCAA regulations.

The best thing the G5 could do is breakaway with us.

I agree 100% with this but you know as well as I do that the P5 likely are not interested. Also don't think it's as easy as this post makes it seem. Lots of money has been ponied up and is flowing for the CFP and TV deals.

(01-20-2014 06:41 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 06:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 06:04 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Your list just of "reasons for expansion" doesn't make a lot of sense to discuss right now. When the CFP and all the TV deals run it's course, then yeah, maybe we talk about a major reshuffling of the deck again. Even then, that time period to run out those contracts is an eternity for developing technologies and how entertainment is distributed.

Actually a breakaway would be the best thing that could happen. Insanity is staying in the NCAA and trying to make a bloated out of touch bureaucracy try to work. It's easier to make the break. The CFP and the new contracts don't mean a danged thing. They were signed with NCAA teams. New contracts would be needed for all making the break. The CFP wants the best teams and are banking on it. They would sign a new deal in a heartbeat, especially if they didn't have to work within the morass of NCAA regulations.

The best thing the G5 could do is breakaway with us.

I agree 100% with this but you know as well as I do that the P5 likely are not interested. Also don't think it's as easy as this post makes it seem. Lots of money has been ponied up and is flowing for the CFP and TV deals.

My point is who did they pony it up for? The money will go where the product goes. If you took the G5 and streamlined it to a G4 and took the P5 and streamlined it to a P4 you have your playoff structure. The P4 will need closer OOC games for baseball, basketball, and all minor sports. There is absolutely no reason why the P4 and G4 should not share those sports, it cuts overhead, adds to variety, and provides for some drama in both the baseball and basketball tournaments. Let the P4 limit competition to 10 P4 schools and two G4 schools per year. The G4 gets exposure and the big pay day so they don't lose that money. With a playoff structure of their own for football they gain revenue. All they have to do is remain flexible for television. And in the process they separate themselves from everyone else. If P4 expansion is needed then you have a closed pool of G4 teams to choose from. It would be much better for the G4 than remaining in the NCAA, and you'll keep more of your basketball revenue. The biggest obstacle is simply in breaking with old bad habits, but then it always is.

(01-20-2014 03:34 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-20-2014 02:45 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  since this all about money, what's to stop the G5, asking the P5 to compensate them monetarily, for the autonomy they want. Some will see it as blackmail, like the God Father said. "nothing personal just business". Like pay so many millions into a community pot for the next 10-15 years for the G5 to split between themselves

I don't think tax status is going to be a big deal. Even at the P5 level, most athletic departments lose money---so there is no "profit". Besides, athletics exist as a nothing more than a department within the university. So, its hard to see how a arm of the school, that for most schools loses money, is ever going to make the school lose its current tax status.

Now, government might just decide to get involved for reasons of "general welfare" of the people. Less than 10% of the people follow college sports closely and keep in mind, half the population is women. So even though the P5 have bigger fan bases, the casual public believes in fair play. The current caste system of big time athletics and the back room elitism would not appeal to the average persons sense of fair play.

All it takes is the right committee chair at the right time to change the whole landscape of college football. These types of things are usually brought on by a media story that goes viral. Very unpredictable stuff. lol....Once government gets involved, its likely nobody will be happy.

G5 definitely has the high ground, with public opinion on this. Just hope they don't fritter it away.
Everything in our society is about the few exploiting the many and idiot members of the many helping it to happen.

(01-20-2014 04:51 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  One possible solution is to pay the new comers to the P5,a smaller share of the T.V. revenue, based on what's commensurate with their contributuon to overall market share and viability to thier respective conference. Example: instead if each current conference member is making 20 million per, maybe the newcomer school only gets 10 million or whatever amount is decided based on some formula. They continue to get this initial amount and it can grow each year based on aformentioned formula until they can reach full share after 6 to 12 year period depending how their TV viewership and home game attendance grows within their market.If they can never reach full share they will be just stuck at the share they are deserving of, based on the formula.

I wonder how comfortable the weaker link teams currently in the P5 conferences would be wearing that same collar?