(06-21-2020 08:41 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 08:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 08:28 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Another thing I see when the data is arrayed this was is that BC, Rutgers, West Virginia, Wake Forest, Vandy, and MD are making little to no money despite television contracts. There are various reasons of course. But they are also somewhat clustered as a group.

The truth is Vandy simply doesn't even try. That's a rub. What's more their venues are substandard to the rest of the SEC and there is little incentive on their part to address the matter.

People get upset when breakaway talk enters the picture, but the laggards are pulling down everyone's payouts. A new association of 48-56 is what I hear and see kicked around and when you look at the investment levels it becomes pretty obvious as to why.

Duke football rode the ACC like a Tick and after bitching at them they hired Spurrier. Then they went back to the old ways. We bitched again and they hired Cutcliffe. Duke likes money but needs no money. That can raise what they need in a few days. However making Duke field a competitive football team takes about 3 recruits a year from State, 5 from Carolina, and 5 from Wake Forest. If half of them pan out by the senior year that's 6 kids from State, 10 from Carolina and 10 from Wake, not to mention football games played in the backyard that create little exposure outside a band running from Charlotte to Richmond.

Everyone dumps on Texas for underachieving. Texas made one mistake in seeking the Big 12''s creation. They should have moved with Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and Arkansas. Then Baylor and T.C.U. would have been relegated to a lower tier. That alone would have meant that UT had that many more top recruits from Texas on their team. It would have helped A&M in similar proportions and would have helped Tech some too.

If UT does that they have the depth to be in contention in the Big 12 at the end of the year. Oklahoma is like Alabama. Their history is so storied and deep they get who they want from Oklahoma and a good number from DFW. They also recruit nationally. It is the elevation of T.C.U. and Baylor in addition to Tech and A&M that has Texas thin. The same thing is happening in North Carolina. Even Wake gets some solid players. By keeping 4 P5 teams in North Carolina and a usually competitive East Carolina the talent is spread way too thin.

The growth of UCF and USF have cut into the talent pool for UF, FSU and especially Miami and it shows.

Why has USC football tanked? In part it's because High School participation dipped in California and the talent is being split 5 ways counting San Diego State. 6 more 4 to 5 star players on a roster means you have quality depth by the 7th game of the season and when those late season injuries start to pile up that is essential to winning a conference title or better.

Having F.S.U., Tennessee, Georgia Tech, Florida and Florida State all sub par in addition to Spurrier leaving South Carolina is what helped Dabo grow what he has at Clemson. With Georgia and possibly Tennessee and Florida trending up I'll be interested to see if this lasts.

Consolidation is going to happen. It will happen within states and thereby in conferences. The available talent pool is shrinking nationally with parents concerned about CTE's. The upper tier will shrink to match that pool either by the manipulations of the best established state schools, or the loss of donations following multiple loosing seasons for the 3rd, 4th, and sometimes 5th school in the state's pecking order. In Florida the demographics could actually flip some of the order over time simply due to graduating class sizes. It will be interesting to watch.