https://sports.yahoo.com/while-other-con...47810.html

Cuse took ASU's DC to become our DC about a week ago.

The bad news is this is possibly heading to a Big 2.

As the B1G and SEC continue to separate themselves from the ACC, B12 and PAC financially, there will be a power 2.

(02-13-2020 09:44 AM)Chappy Wrote:  As the B1G and SEC continue to separate themselves from the ACC, B12 and PAC financially, there will be a power 2.

I feel like, as long as Texas is in the Big 12, they'll be ok. They are a eyeball/merchandise machine.

I don't think the same can be said of Clemson. Two bad seasons in a row and everyone would forget about them.

(02-13-2020 10:01 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 09:44 AM)Chappy Wrote:  As the B1G and SEC continue to separate themselves from the ACC, B12 and PAC financially, there will be a power 2.

I feel like, as long as Texas is in the Big 12, they'll be ok. They are a eyeball/merchandise machine.

I don't think the same can be said of Clemson. Two bad seasons in a row and everyone would forget about them.

The Pac 12 will be fine too with USC, UCLA, Stanford, Oregon and Washington in the mix. It is no different than Texas and Oklahoma in the B12: Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan in the B10: Clemson and Florida St in the ACC: or Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, and LSU in the SEC. Yes there is a revenue difference but the Pac 12 will run with the best of them on the field too when their top programs rise to the levels of expectation again too. The Pac 12 can do better in scheduling and their revenue streams too when they get rid of their current commissioner who is more interested in his perks and lavish offices in Frisco. Face it schools have down years. Not so long ago Texas and USC were riding on top. Recently it has been Alabama and Clemson. All of these premiere programs are just a coach away from the top and or falling into mediocrity at one point or another in time.

(02-13-2020 10:01 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 09:44 AM)Chappy Wrote:  As the B1G and SEC continue to separate themselves from the ACC, B12 and PAC financially, there will be a power 2.

I feel like, as long as Texas is in the Big 12, they'll be ok. They are a eyeball/merchandise machine.

I don't think the same can be said of Clemson. Two bad seasons in a row and everyone would forget about them.

I like how now they are starting to sound the alarm when finally some of the big boys are now getting priced out of things. Its Larry Scott and Pac 12's fault that they are falling behind.

Meanwhile teams like Washington St, NC State, Rutgers can ride the coat tails and cash checks while not being better than 1/2 the AAC.

(02-13-2020 09:41 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Cuse took ASU's DC to become our DC about a week ago.

The bad news is this is possibly heading to a Big 2.

I believe it was Pat Forde who said the same thing.. with TV money, the Power 5 is quickly becoming a Power 2. It's bad when a coach who goes 1 year at 5-7 can make top 15 money, simply because the school/conference has more money than they know what to do with.

IMO this is a scary, scary era in college football and tides could shift dramatically. 6 months ago I thought it was a stupid realignment proposal, but it's looking more like the top schools (top 20-25) could easily take their ball and play elsewhere, leaving the other 100 to do their own thing. We have 30 or so schools making $60m a year from EPSN/Fox (about 7 or 8 of them are deserving of that money), another 30 or so making $40m a year most who don't deserve it, and there's us peasants making $6-8m. The divide is only going to get wider.

They are until ESPN says that they're not. I mean, that's how all this P5/G5 crap got started, isn't it?

I don't remember any P5 qualifying tournament taking place. Just all of the sudden, these guys are the "power" conferences and these other guys are the lowly "group" of leftovers.

(02-13-2020 10:24 AM)dubcat14 Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 09:41 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Cuse took ASU's DC to become our DC about a week ago.

The bad news is this is possibly heading to a Big 2.

I believe it was Pat Forde who said the same thing.. with TV money, the Power 5 is quickly becoming a Power 2. It's bad when a coach who goes 1 year at 5-7 can make top 15 money, simply because the school/conference has more money than they know what to do with.

IMO this is a scary, scary era in college football and tides could shift dramatically. 6 months ago I thought it was a stupid realignment proposal, but it's looking more like the top schools (top 20-25) could easily take their ball and play elsewhere, leaving the other 100 to do their own thing. We have 30 or so schools making $60m a year from EPSN/Fox (about 7 or 8 of them are deserving of that money), another 30 or so making $40m a year most who don't deserve it, and there's us peasants making $6-8m. The divide is only going to get wider.

Rankings and prestige are built on nice-and-shiny win-loss records. The top 25 schools would shoot themselves in the leg if they were to take their ball and play elsewhere. Alabama needs Mississippi State and Arkansas to build its win-loss record against reasonable competition; Ohio State needs Indiana and Maryland; Oklahoma needs Kansas State and West Virginia.

(02-13-2020 10:21 AM)panite Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 10:01 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 09:44 AM)Chappy Wrote:  As the B1G and SEC continue to separate themselves from the ACC, B12 and PAC financially, there will be a power 2.

I feel like, as long as Texas is in the Big 12, they'll be ok. They are a eyeball/merchandise machine.

I don't think the same can be said of Clemson. Two bad seasons in a row and everyone would forget about them.

The Pac 12 will be fine too with USC, UCLA, Stanford, Oregon and Washington in the mix. It is no different than Texas and Oklahoma in the B12: Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan in the B10: Clemson and Florida St in the ACC: or Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, and LSU in the SEC. Yes there is a revenue difference but the Pac 12 will run with the best of them on the field too when their top programs rise to the levels of expectation again too. The Pac 12 can do better in scheduling and their revenue streams too when they get rid of their current commissioner who is more interested in his perks and lavish offices in Frisco. Face it schools have down years. Not so long ago Texas and USC were riding on top. Recently it has been Alabama and Clemson. All of these premiere programs are just a coach away from the top and or falling into mediocrity at one point or another in time.

I don't disagree that they will be fine on the field and on the court. But I think the point of the article is that they will be every bit as vulnerable to coach poaching as the G5 is right now, and I agree with that. See FSU losing Jimbo to Texas A&M. If any B1G or SEC school can double the salary of an ACC or PAC12 coach, then they will be coach grooming leagues just like the AAC is now.

(02-13-2020 10:33 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  They are until ESPN says that they're not. I mean, that's how all this P5/G5 crap got started, isn't it?

I don't remember any P5 qualifying tournament taking place. Just all of the sudden, these guys are the "power" conferences and these other guys are the lowly "group" of leftovers.

Before the P5, they were called the BCS and the Bowl Coalition. There hasn't been much movement in the power structure since the SWC disbanded in 1996.

The casualties over the last couple of decades include Cincinnati, UConn, USF, and Temple....and there's an argument that these schools were only nominally part of the BCS power structure - temporary replacements or gap-fillers until they could get the Big East situation sorted out.

Utah and TCU each received a golden ticket and Louisville, West Virginia, Pitt, and Syracuse received a lifeline. The rest of the power structure has looked the same for decades.

(02-13-2020 10:22 AM)bearcat29 Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 10:01 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 09:44 AM)Chappy Wrote:  As the B1G and SEC continue to separate themselves from the ACC, B12 and PAC financially, there will be a power 2.

I feel like, as long as Texas is in the Big 12, they'll be ok. They are a eyeball/merchandise machine.

I don't think the same can be said of Clemson. Two bad seasons in a row and everyone would forget about them.

I like how now they are starting to sound the alarm when finally some of the big boys are now getting priced out of things. Its Larry Scott and Pac 12's fault that they are falling behind.

Meanwhile teams like Washington St, NC State, Rutgers can ride the coat tails and cash checks while not being better than 1/2 the AAC.

Rutgers isn't getting a full share yet but I'm glad they are where they are today. Rutgers invested in its programs, stadium, and other facilities to be in the right place when the B10 came calling. Yes the football program is currently a mess but hopefully Schiano can clean up that mess and at least be bowl eligible annually. Rutgers might even be able to move into the 4th place spot in the East for FB for a while behind Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan with the MSU mess at this time. Also Rutgers is doing well in the B10 with the rest or their sports even Men's BB at this time ahead of schools like Ohio St, Michigan, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Indiana so they are more than a place holder in the conference drawing a welfare check.

(02-13-2020 11:33 AM)panite Wrote:  Rutgers isn't getting a full share yet but I'm glad they are where they are today. Rutgers invested in its programs, stadium, and other facilities to be in the right place when the B10 came calling. Yes the football program is currently a mess but hopefully Schiano can clean up that mess and at least be bowl eligible annually. Rutgers might even be able to move into the 4th place spot in the East for FB for a while behind Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan with the MSU mess at this time. Also Rutgers is doing well in the B10 with the rest or their sports even Men's BB at this time ahead of schools like Ohio St, Michigan, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Indiana so they are more than a place holder in the conference drawing a welfare check.

Puh-leeeease. The only "right place" Rutgers was in was being adjacent to the NYC market.

Clearly it is a power conference. Its also just as clear that the Pac-12 is not the apex of power conferences.

(02-13-2020 11:42 AM)coogrfan Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 11:33 AM)panite Wrote:  Rutgers isn't getting a full share yet but I'm glad they are where they are today. Rutgers invested in its programs, stadium, and other facilities to be in the right place when the B10 came calling. Yes the football program is currently a mess but hopefully Schiano can clean up that mess and at least be bowl eligible annually. Rutgers might even be able to move into the 4th place spot in the East for FB for a while behind Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan with the MSU mess at this time. Also Rutgers is doing well in the B10 with the rest or their sports even Men's BB at this time ahead of schools like Ohio St, Michigan, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Indiana so they are more than a place holder in the conference drawing a welfare check.

Puh-leeeease. The only "right place" Rutgers was in was being adjacent to the NYC market.

No, Rutgers is in the exact place for them.

Where else can you have a coach physically abuse his players and it is looked at as child's play compared to your new peers.

(02-13-2020 11:42 AM)coogrfan Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 11:33 AM)panite Wrote:  Rutgers isn't getting a full share yet but I'm glad they are where they are today. Rutgers invested in its programs, stadium, and other facilities to be in the right place when the B10 came calling. Yes the football program is currently a mess but hopefully Schiano can clean up that mess and at least be bowl eligible annually. Rutgers might even be able to move into the 4th place spot in the East for FB for a while behind Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan with the MSU mess at this time. Also Rutgers is doing well in the B10 with the rest or their sports even Men's BB at this time ahead of schools like Ohio St, Michigan, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Indiana so they are more than a place holder in the conference drawing a welfare check.

Puh-leeeease. The only "right place" Rutgers was in was being adjacent to the NYC market.

Sounds like some butt hurt here. Plain and simple Rutgers invested. Schools like Houston did not until after the realignment.

(02-13-2020 12:31 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 11:42 AM)coogrfan Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 11:33 AM)panite Wrote:  Rutgers isn't getting a full share yet but I'm glad they are where they are today. Rutgers invested in its programs, stadium, and other facilities to be in the right place when the B10 came calling. Yes the football program is currently a mess but hopefully Schiano can clean up that mess and at least be bowl eligible annually. Rutgers might even be able to move into the 4th place spot in the East for FB for a while behind Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan with the MSU mess at this time. Also Rutgers is doing well in the B10 with the rest or their sports even Men's BB at this time ahead of schools like Ohio St, Michigan, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Indiana so they are more than a place holder in the conference drawing a welfare check.

Puh-leeeease. The only "right place" Rutgers was in was being adjacent to the NYC market.

No, Rutgers is in the exact place for them.

Where else can you have a coach physically abuse his players and it is looked at as child's play compared to your new peers.

I have seen a lot worse at Ohio St, Penn State, Baylor, and Michigan St. The AD wanted to get rid of the BB coach in question and the president said no. When the crap hit the fan the president got rid of both to save his own hide and then brought the Louisville problem in only to have to dispose of her. The men's BB mess could have been nipped in the bud at the beginning when the abuse came out but the politics like the other universities took precedence first. Not right but Rutgers eventually straighten the situation out and has a lucrative future in front of it because the school had the foresight to invest in its self prior to the last major realignment cycle.

(02-13-2020 10:33 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  They are until ESPN says that they're not. I mean, that's how all this P5/G5 crap got started, isn't it?

I don't remember any P5 qualifying tournament taking place. Just all of the sudden, these guys are the "power" conferences and these other guys are the lowly "group" of leftovers.

Correct. If the media/talking heads say they are, then they are. That's how all of this got started anyway.

Conference bigwigs and TV networks had an ulterior motive to promote this power 5 agenda back around the time the Big East split up, and that's how it began.

(02-13-2020 11:09 AM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-13-2020 10:33 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  They are until ESPN says that they're not. I mean, that's how all this P5/G5 crap got started, isn't it?

I don't remember any P5 qualifying tournament taking place. Just all of the sudden, these guys are the "power" conferences and these other guys are the lowly "group" of leftovers.

Before the P5, they were called the BCS and the Bowl Coalition. There hasn't been much movement in the power structure since the SWC disbanded in 1996.

The casualties over the last couple of decades include Cincinnati, UConn, USF, and Temple....and there's an argument that these schools were only nominally part of the BCS power structure - temporary replacements or gap-fillers until they could get the Big East situation sorted out.

Utah and TCU each received a golden ticket and Louisville, West Virginia, Pitt, and Syracuse received a lifeline. The rest of the power structure has looked the same for decades.

Prior to the BCS and the Bowl Alliance there were power programs, not power conferences. Nobody thought Mississippi State was better than Southern Miss just because of the conference patch on their uniform. Moreover, MSU was not getting 50x the revenue of Southern Miss* from their conference.


* There are numerous other examples here.

Is the Big 12 a P5 conference? One of their coaches got poached by Houston a year ago...

USFFan