(08-15-2016 10:33 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote: (08-15-2016 10:10 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: I love a good super-conference thread.
There is a certain regional conglomeration that I would like to see. I'm serious about that even though I know some don't want to see it.
I'm more in GTS' camp as far as how I would set it up.
The SEC and ACC are natural partners. Most of the Big 12 would fit in as well.
That's not a conference though. That's a new division.
I could see a regional realignment. (I'd be against it too )
NE/SE/NW/SW/MW/TX
Problem is, how to you balance it. The Programs would be easy to plug in, but how do you balance the money? How do you balance fairness? Do we all get the same T.V. Revenue if the SE is bringing in 5 billion a year and the NE is bringing in 1 billion?
It's all one big complicated issue.
This is why I don't think a new division or a new setup would work.
Not to mention the point that has been out there forever. Someone has to lose. Say you take a program like Iowa who can win an average of 6-7 games per season, make their fans happy by going to Bowls 7/10 years with the occasional Conference Championship type season. Put them in a new division and say their wins drop to 3-4 per average per season. A lot of people start losing interest real quick.
We as Americans are very fickle. We love to support a winner but we are quick to turn away from a loser. The one place I always felt was different was in the SEC. Our fans are loyal, we have tons of respect for each other and our respective programs. I don't wanna dilute that or tarnish that with some of the other stuff I have seen around the country.
Maybe I am just stuck in my ways or what I am comfortable with... Change is always difficult.
Don't get me wrong. I don't want the entire country in one league for some of the reasons you stated.
I do totally agree with you that every league needs some bottom feeders and the opportunity for some programs to rise and others to fall. If not then the competition just becomes too difficult. I don't think you have to give that up with big leagues though, just make sure you include the weak programs along with the strong ones. That's why the notion of merging conferences doesn't bother me. If everyone comes along then it's pretty much the same thing as far as strength of schedule goes. It's also why I don't have a problem including a few more G5s because some of those programs will likely never be major competitors.
There's a few general reasons I like the idea of the super conference....
1. Sooner or later all the Power leagues are pretty much going to exclusively play each other. There won't be any more FCS games or multiple match-ups with G5 schools. The cupcakes may never completely go away, but I think we'll see at least 11 quality games for everyone on a regular basis. The fans will eventually demand it for all the money they pay for tickets and the like. Networks will like it because they can have more valuable content to sell to advertisers
Anyway, if some of these leagues combine then we can have a more structured way of making sure everyone is playing a good balance of strong match-ups and weaker match-ups all the while playing high profile schools. We can play rivals on a yearly basis and still schedule schools from other regions, but what would have been a non-conference game in the past will have the added interest and value of helping decide the conference race.
2. All these schools coming under one roof will give them greater leverage when negotiating with networks because so much content will be at stake. Right now, the networks have the greater leverage because there are fewer bidders than producers. We can flip that dynamic to some degree and come out financially stronger.
I hate to make it sound like its all about money because it shouldn't be, but you need money to make these athletic departments solvent and independent of funding from the academic side of the university. That and more money in the coffers should help the non-revenue sports...maybe we can even revive some of the old sports that got sacrificed when Title XI was implemented.
That and I think we need to do more to compensate some of these athletes. With more money at our disposal, that becomes a lot easier to manage. I'm not advocating paying players or anything. I'm just saying we could provide better health insurance, stipends, and continuing education opportunities. I don't think that would be out of proportion with what the athletes contribute to the university. I think that's especially true when you consider the decreasing value of a college education.
3. Bringing regional rivals from different conferences together. Especially when we're talking about old SEC and ACC schools, most of these used to be in the same league before the SEC was formed in 1932. If we're back under one roof then some of these old rivalries can be renewed and create more interesting games for everyone.
Auburn and Alabama both used to play Georgia Tech every year. Wouldn't it be great if we could do that more frequently? Same goes for some of these other match-ups between schools that aren't located that far apart.
One of the positive side effects of that is better travel for fans. If our divisions are more regionally based rather than centered on the conference we're in then a lot of fans won't have to travel as far as often as they do now.
I hope that all makes sense. Again, I completely understand why someone would be against it. There would certainly be bumps in the road if something like this happened. I just think the positives outweigh the negatives.