...this really applies to the G5 (although a case can be made for Texas to go Indy as well).

Here are some reasons that can be used to justify independence:

1. The TV money isn't enough to warrant being tied to a conference. I'm pretty darn sure that a number of G5 schools can schedule 6h/6a and make enough between "buy" contracts and independent TV money (by game) to match the peanuts they are making already. You're not sacrificing 20m+ a year in going indy.

2. Greater control over scheduling. You can play the schools that you ACTUALLY want to. There are some G5 schools that would struggle to fill a schedule - but I'd wager a guess and say that half of them wouldn't struggle to do so.

3. Greater control over kickoff times.

4. You can always join a local conference for smaller sports if necessary. This happens all across the college landscape in the form of "affiliate memberships".

5. Keep what you kill - your branding is 100% your own.

6. Winning a G5 conference has ZERO value. P5 conferences have high-end bowl tie-ins.

7. Low end bowls will always be looking for teams. You will probably NOT struggle to find a bowl game if you go 8-4 in the year 2014.

---------

I imagine that there are reasons this doesn't happen, but I'm not sure what they are.

I would say good luck..

Sounds easy but a lot of crap to weed through to be independent.

It would take an organized effort between many (or enough) schools that desired independence. If that happened it's all very workable.

(04-30-2014 09:12 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  I would say good luck..

Sounds easy but a lot of crap to weed through to be independent.

It's not easy - not at all. That doesn't meant that is isn't worth it. Why pay an AD if they're going to be lazy whenever work is involved?

(04-30-2014 09:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  ...this really applies to the G5 (although a case can be made for Texas to go Indy as well).

Here are some reasons that can be used to justify independence:

1. The TV money isn't enough to warrant being tied to a conference. I'm pretty darn sure that a number of G5 schools can schedule 6h/6a and make enough between "buy" contracts and independent TV money (by game) to match the peanuts they are making already. You're not sacrificing 20m+ a year in going indy.

2. Greater control over scheduling. You can play the schools that you ACTUALLY want to. There are some G5 schools that would struggle to fill a schedule - but I'd wager a guess and say that half of them wouldn't struggle to do so.

3. Greater control over kickoff times.

4. You can always join a local conference for smaller sports if necessary. This happens all across the college landscape in the form of "affiliate memberships".

5. Keep what you kill - your branding is 100% your own.

6. Winning a G5 conference has ZERO value. P5 conferences have high-end bowl tie-ins.

7. Low end bowls will always be looking for teams. You will probably NOT struggle to find a bowl game if you go 8-4 in the year 2014.

---------

I imagine that there are reasons this doesn't happen, but I'm not sure what they are.

1. No bowls-you might end up in Idaho or totally in the cold
2. No playoff money
3. No one to schedule in October and November
4. No place for your non-rev sports to play-they won't necessarily want you and at best, you are probably stuck in a mish-mash conference like the Summit, which is always a couple of defections away from extinction
5. Unless you are BYU, almost certainly even less money

Even Notre Dame was forced to join the ACC because of #1 and #3.

(04-30-2014 09:17 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 09:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  ...this really applies to the G5 (although a case can be made for Texas to go Indy as well).

Here are some reasons that can be used to justify independence:

1. The TV money isn't enough to warrant being tied to a conference. I'm pretty darn sure that a number of G5 schools can schedule 6h/6a and make enough between "buy" contracts and independent TV money (by game) to match the peanuts they are making already. You're not sacrificing 20m+ a year in going indy.

2. Greater control over scheduling. You can play the schools that you ACTUALLY want to. There are some G5 schools that would struggle to fill a schedule - but I'd wager a guess and say that half of them wouldn't struggle to do so.

3. Greater control over kickoff times.

4. You can always join a local conference for smaller sports if necessary. This happens all across the college landscape in the form of "affiliate memberships".

5. Keep what you kill - your branding is 100% your own.

6. Winning a G5 conference has ZERO value. P5 conferences have high-end bowl tie-ins.

7. Low end bowls will always be looking for teams. You will probably NOT struggle to find a bowl game if you go 8-4 in the year 2014.

---------

I imagine that there are reasons this doesn't happen, but I'm not sure what they are.

1. No bowls-you might end up in Idaho or totally in the cold
2. No playoff money
3. No one to schedule in October and November
4. No place for your non-rev sports to play-they won't necessarily want you and at best, you are probably stuck in a mish-mash conference like the Summit, which is always a couple of defections away from extinction
5. Unless you are BYU, almost certainly even less money

Responses:

#1: I'm not buying this. There are certain bowls that would LOVE to have certain schools regardless of conference affiliation. However, the keyword is "certain".

#2: That's about $1m/year. You are right about this point.

#3: Let's pretend that Tulane wanted to go independent tomorrow. Tulane's revenue/value is around #80-85 overall - which makes them an above-average G5 program in terms of size.

Tulane could feasibly put together a schedule with the following schools:

- Syracuse (decent relationship between schools)
- Wake/Duke (already scheduled)
- GT (former SEC mate, they'll actually play here as well)
- Navy (tons of history)
- BYU (they also need games)
- Army (former C-USA mate)
- La Tech (they want to play Tulane - badly)
- UL-Lafayette (same as La Tech)
- Rice (wouldn't say no)
- Ole Miss/Miss St. (history - they'll take 1-1 or 0-1-1 in the Superdome)

+ two at-large games that could rotate around

Tulane could get to 12 - although it's not easy. Keep in mind that while Tulane are a historic progam, they are NOT a "tip-top G5 program".

UConn - for example - could do even better.

I think that every school should be independent in every sport and be free to schedule whomever they want.

I think that every school should be independent and try to put together whatever TV deal they can without relying on a collective. That is the "eat what you kill" part you mentioned.

I think that conferences in general are a very bad idea and dislike the very idea of them.

I think that college football was very much better when FSU, Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia, Penn State, etc.. were all football independents.

I think that this "Borg like", "one size fits all", "everyone needs to be in a conference" idea is boring, destroys tradition and rivalries and takes too much power out of college presidents and AD's and puts too much power in the hands of conference commissioners.

I think that independence could/would foster better, more varied schedules and intersectional rivalries.

But, I am a dinosaur, in the extreme minority, nobody cares what I think and that bridge has already been crossed and burned down.

I think a major reason why you aren't going to see more independents quite frankly is no access to the G5 slot in the BCS.

Also with the bowls. Bowls like certainty. Bowls today all have tie-ins. So it's not that bowls wouldn't like to have a team- but it's just impossible for that because of all the tie-ins. I mean look at last year with Notre Dame. If 3-4 games had gone differently, Notre Dame is home for the holidays- or in an even smaller bowl than the Pinstripe. And if you don't think this is a huge issue- it is the #1 reason why Notre Dame is in the ACC now for everything but Football and 4-5 games for football. So if Notre Dame finds it hard, what makes you think any G5 team would have an easier go of it.

I think a group of 4-6 G5's could pull off independence if they operated as a coalition. They could band together for TV and bowl agreements. They could schedule each other for late season games to eliminate that scheduling issue. For example---say Houston, Tulane, SMU, ECU, UCF, and USF chose to go independent and worked together---they could all schedule each other, along with Army and BYU. Together, all 8 could collectively negotiate for bowl slots (there used to be a group of indy schools that worked with the Liberty Bowl for instance). The group could even negotiate for TV rights---or they could do that individually--or a little of both.

The downside is no access to the G5 BCS slot, very little CFP money, and no auto-bid for NCAA sports. The upside is the possibility of fashioning much more attractive schedules and complete control over travel costs.

(04-30-2014 09:52 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I think a major reason why you aren't going to see more independents quite frankly is no access to the G5 slot in the BCS.

Also with the bowls. Bowls like certainty. Bowls today all have tie-ins. So it's not that bowls wouldn't like to have a team- but it's just impossible for that because of all the tie-ins. I mean look at last year with Notre Dame. If 3-4 games had gone differently, Notre Dame is home for the holidays- or in an even smaller bowl than the Pinstripe. And if you don't think this is a huge issue- it is the #1 reason why Notre Dame is in the ACC now for everything but Football and 4-5 games for football. So if Notre Dame finds it hard, what makes you think any G5 team would have an easier go of it.

Notre Dame, despite having the service academy ties, still found themselves scheduling Western Michigan and Tulsa in the middle of the season. The Pac 12 and Big 10 were in the process of becoming more restrictive on ooc games after September.

In 2012 Middle Tennessee went 8-4 and Louisiana Tech went 9-3 and sat home while 6-6 teams went to bowls. MTSU had announced they were leaving the Sun Belt and got no Sun Belt bowls. La Tech was in the dying WAC. Like I said, they would be lucky if they got to go to Idaho.

(04-30-2014 09:44 AM)TerryD Wrote:  I think that every school should be independent in every sport and be free to schedule whomever they want.

I think that every school should be independent and try to put together whatever TV deal they can without relying on a collective. That is the "eat what you kill" part you mentioned.

I think that conferences in general are a very bad idea and dislike the very idea of them.

I think that college football was very much better when FSU, Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia, Penn State, etc.. were all football independents.

I think that this "Borg like", "one size fits all", "everyone needs to be in a conference" idea is boring, destroys tradition and rivalries and takes too much power out of college presidents and AD's and puts too much power in the hands of conference commissioners.

I think that independence could/would foster better, more varied schedules and intersectional rivalries.

But, I am a dinosaur, in the extreme minority, nobody cares what I think and that bridge has already been crossed and burned down.

Replace "dinosaur" with "whippersnapper", and this post would be from me. There are at least two of us in that boat.

(04-30-2014 10:00 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think a group of 4-6 G5's could pull off independence if they operated as a coalition. They could band together for TV and bowl agreements. They could schedule each other for late season games to eliminate that scheduling issue. For example---say Houston, Tulane, SMU, ECU, UCF, and USF chose to go independent and worked together---they could all schedule each other, along with Army and BYU. Together, all 8 could collectively negotiate for bowl slots (there used to be a group of indy schools that worked with the Liberty Bowl for instance). The group could even negotiate for TV rights---or they could do that individually--or a little of both.

The downside is no access to the G5 BCS slot, very little CFP money, and no auto-bid for NCAA sports. The upside is the possibility of fashioning much more attractive schedules and complete control over travel costs.

Smells like a conference to me.

I'm on board with Terry's idea. Let schools feed off of their own hunt rather than the collective kills of the conference.

The majority are reasons NOT to go independent. BYU is the case study.

(04-30-2014 09:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  1. The TV money isn't enough to warrant being tied to a conference. I'm pretty darn sure that a number of G5 schools can schedule 6h/6a and make enough between "buy" contracts and independent TV money (by game) to match the peanuts they are making already. You're not sacrificing 20m+ a year in going indy.

Lood at BYU's schedule: 6H/6A per yer with the preponderance of good games on the road due to 2:1 or lopsided H:H:N scheduling arrangements with P5 schools. It's hard to sell season tickets when the home schedule is poor.

(04-30-2014 09:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  2. Greater control over scheduling. You can play the schools that you ACTUALLY want to. There are some G5 schools that would struggle to fill a schedule - but I'd wager a guess and say that half of them wouldn't struggle to do so.

Again, look at BYU's contracted home games with ESPN. They're all Thursday and Friday night games.

(04-30-2014 09:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  4. You can always join a local conference for smaller sports if necessary. This happens all across the college landscape in the form of "affiliate memberships".

Can an indy recruit BBall when the school consistently plays in HS gyms?

(04-30-2014 09:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  5. Keep what you kill - your branding is 100% your own.

That's pretty much true.

(04-30-2014 09:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  6. Winning a G5 conference has ZERO value. P5 conferences have high-end bowl tie-ins.

This is the biggest fallacy. An indy team is one loss away from irrelevance every year. A conference championship keeps the fan base engaged throughout the season after being eliminated from the CFB. There's also the interest of player for a better contracted bowl rather than knowing it's either the CFB or the one contracted crap bowl every year.

(04-30-2014 09:05 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  7. Low end bowls will always be looking for teams. You will probably NOT struggle to find a bowl game if you go 8-4 in the year 2014.

The pecking order for at large would still be P5/G5/Indy

(04-30-2014 10:19 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 10:00 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think a group of 4-6 G5's could pull off independence if they operated as a coalition. They could band together for TV and bowl agreements. They could schedule each other for late season games to eliminate that scheduling issue. For example---say Houston, Tulane, SMU, ECU, UCF, and USF chose to go independent and worked together---they could all schedule each other, along with Army and BYU. Together, all 8 could collectively negotiate for bowl slots (there used to be a group of indy schools that worked with the Liberty Bowl for instance). The group could even negotiate for TV rights---or they could do that individually--or a little of both.

The downside is no access to the G5 BCS slot, very little CFP money, and no auto-bid for NCAA sports. The upside is the possibility of fashioning much more attractive schedules and complete control over travel costs.

Smells like a conference to me.

In some ways it is. It just doesn't have a championship or an 8 game season. Its what conferences originally started as---scheduling arrangements. By the way, you wouldnt schedule all 8 schools---just 4 to 5 or in the middle and latter portions of the season where being indy becomes so difficult. So a G5 schools could end up with as many as 7-8 P5 opponents if they can pull it off. More likely, they end up with 3-5 P5 schools, a couple of attractive G5's that make sense for that school in question, and then they fill in the gaps with the indy coalition. Sounds better than most G5 schedules. That said, the P5 moving to 9 conference games might make going indy less attractive as the number of P5 game available might dwindle.

Many conferences used to have around 8-10 members. These members would have close ties between each other and genuinely enjoy each others company.

The ancient Big Ten used to be a brilliant conference in that regard. The Pac 8 was also a brilliant conference - although Arizona and Arizona State are both wonderful fits to that league (the Pac-10 was also brilliant).

I posted this thread just for conversation purposes. I think that the best model to use in college football is an organic setup of smaller, tighter conferences that can all sell a unique and particular flavor.

I HATE superconferences.

A fun little activity to do when you are bored is to make a spreadsheet with all of the relevant schools and create independent schedules for all of them. You have to be honest about it, which usually means starting from the top (Texas, Alabama, Ohio State, etc.) and working your way down. It creates some really tremendous schedules, especially for the border schools in a conference, like Arkansas, Kentucky, Penn State, Virginia, and Kansas. The most geographical difficult schools, like most of the PAC and Minnesota, don't have a lot of changes since their "peer" opportunities are limited. Try making 7, 8, 9, 10, or even 11 and 12 game independent schedules for each school, and you will find that almost everyone has a similar schedule to what they play now. West Virginia is an obvious outlier, and the ACC is very much split into North or South. That is part of why the PAC, Big 10, and SEC have been so solid throughout this realignment process; they are pretty much already playing who they want to play.

There is CFP money for independents - and it's about the same as it is for those in the G5 - about $1M-$1.5M per year. Now that could change drastically if there's a mass exodus of schools from G5 conferences, though, as the G5 are slated to split a certain percentage of the pot and the share for independents isn't tied to a number of independents. So instead of 3-4 teams splitting $4M/year, it would be more teams splitting that same amount.

(04-30-2014 10:39 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  There is CFP money for independents - and it's about the same as it is for those in the G5 - about $1M-$1.5M per year. Now that could change drastically if there's a mass exodus of schools from G5 conferences, though, as the G5 are slated to split a certain percentage of the pot and the share for independents isn't tied to a number of independents. So instead of 3-4 teams splitting $4M/year, it would be more teams splitting that same amount.

Not only that, but then you would find the G5 conferences that lost teams would replace- and then add more FCS callups. So you would wind up with still 60ish G5 schools, and then all the independents.