(07-06-2021 06:56 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe the Top 16 schools that make all the money need to break away and keep it.


1. Ohio State: $225,542,037
2. Texas: $191,737,849
3. Alabama: $189,242,298
4. Georgia: $179,295,904
5. Michigan: $168,244,643
7. Penn State: $165,077,390
8. Louisiana State: $160,460,476
9. Oklahoma: $159,116,738
10. Florida State: $155,656,855
11. Auburn: $153,703,749
12. Iowa: $145,095,544
13. Wisconsin: $143,954,553
14. Texas A&M: $143,807,835
15. Louisville: $140,867,112
16. Florida: $139,287,811

Just missed the cut…..
17. Kentucky: $138,492,743

Just for fun, I took the top 36 schools in revenue with the goal of creating a single conference with 6 rational divisions. To make the geography work, I had to drop #27 Indiana and #32 Minnesota and replaced them with #38 California and #40 Oregon to create a Pacific division.

The result was that some basketball schools with so-so football programs (or worse) made the cut. Which is OK, since every conference needs some reliable losers to help enhance the W-L records of the top teams.

My divisions (listed in order of the highest revenue within each division) from west to east:

Washington, Stanford, USC, UCLA,California, Oregon
Texas, LSU, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, TCU, Kansas
Ohio State, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Northwestern
Alabama, Auburn, Louisville, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas
Georgia, Florida State, Florida, South Carolina, Clemson, Miami
Notre Dame, Penn State, Michigan State, Duke, North Carolina, Virginia

I imagined a 16 team Conference Championship Tournament that includes the top two teams in each division by W-L record, and the four other highest ranked teams at large.

I'd love to be able to negotiate the media deal for that conference and its CCT.

Top 36:
4 by 9:

Big 10: Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska
ACC: Penn State, Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Clemson, South Carolina, Kentucky, Louisville
SEC: Georgia, Florida, Florida State, Miami, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Arkansas, LSU
Pac 12/Big 12: UCLA, USC, Stanford, Washington, Texas, Texas A&M, TCU, Oklahoma, Kansas

Top 16:
East: Ohio State, Georgia, Michigan, Penn State, Florida State, Louisville, Florida, Kentucky (I assume Notre Dame is #6, they would replace Kentucky if they are)
Central: Texas, Alabama, LSU, Oklahoma, Auburn, Iowa, Wisconsin, Texas A&M

(07-06-2021 06:56 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe the Top 16 schools that make all the money need to break away and keep it. ...

However, some substantial share of the money "they make" is money they make playing schools not in the top 16, since fans of the other schools "have to" watch the game against the top 16 school ... whether in hopes of the upset or not.

And operating minor league finishing school operations for the NFL and NBA is an intrinsically volatile process, and the fact that each conference is won by somebody every year means that the per school value of the rights to show the conference race is higher than the average of the rights to show an individual school, when properly discounted for the volatility.

Plus, the biggest pile of media revenue the power conferences do not get is the majority of the value of the NCAA Basketball tournament that goes to subsidize the NCAA ... and 16 is way to small to support a breakaway basketball tournament that has the brand power of the unquestioned top collegiate basketball tournament in the country.

Something like 48 football/basketball schools and an additional 12 basketball specialist schools seems like it would be a more effective money spinner than a top 16, which implies that the 10th best team in the country is likely to have a losing record.

(07-06-2021 10:36 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-06-2021 06:56 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe the Top 16 schools that make all the money need to break away and keep it. ...

However, some substantial share of the money "they make" is money they make playing schools not in the top 16, since fans of the other schools "have to" watch the game against the top 16 school ... whether in hopes of the upset or not.

And operating minor league finishing school operations for the NFL and NBA is an intrinsically volatile process, and the fact that each conference is won by somebody every year means that the per school value of the rights to show the conference race is higher than the average of the rights to show an individual school, when properly discounted for the volatility.

Plus, the biggest pile of media revenue the power conferences do not get is the majority of the value of the NCAA Basketball tournament that goes to subsidize the NCAA ... and 16 is way to small to support a breakaway basketball tournament that has the brand power of the unquestioned top collegiate basketball tournament in the country.

Something like 48 football/basketball schools and an additional 12 basketball specialist schools seems like it would be a more effective money spinner than a top 16, which implies that the 10th best team in the country is likely to have a losing record.

The 36 team breakaway I proposed would include all the schools considered by most to be the basketball bluebloods, and at least 10 national champions. They could easily have their own tournament with an 8 team playin round and round of 32 in the first week. That tournament would be almost as lucrative as the current NCAAT, just split among 36 schools instead of 350.

Certainly there would be some very good programs left out, just as there are some pretty good football programs that don't make the cut. In time, the lack of resources for the schools left behind would probably render them weaker in all sports than they are today. They would still have a viable football playoff and NCAAT. They just wouldn't pay them very much. And they would still get on TV - just not on the prime channels and best time slots.

(07-07-2021 07:40 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-06-2021 10:36 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-06-2021 06:56 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe the Top 16 schools that make all the money need to break away and keep it. ...

However, some substantial share of the money "they make" is money they make playing schools not in the top 16, since fans of the other schools "have to" watch the game against the top 16 school ... whether in hopes of the upset or not.

And operating minor league finishing school operations for the NFL and NBA is an intrinsically volatile process, and the fact that each conference is won by somebody every year means that the per school value of the rights to show the conference race is higher than the average of the rights to show an individual school, when properly discounted for the volatility.

Plus, the biggest pile of media revenue the power conferences do not get is the majority of the value of the NCAA Basketball tournament that goes to subsidize the NCAA ... and 16 is way to small to support a breakaway basketball tournament that has the brand power of the unquestioned top collegiate basketball tournament in the country.

Something like 48 football/basketball schools and an additional 12 basketball specialist schools seems like it would be a more effective money spinner than a top 16, which implies that the 10th best team in the country is likely to have a losing record.

The 36 team breakaway I proposed would include all the schools considered by most to be the basketball bluebloods, and at least 10 national champions. They could easily have their own tournament with an 8 team playin round and round of 32 in the first week. That tournament would be almost as lucrative as the current NCAAT, just split among 36 schools instead of 350.

36 teams with four knocked out in a play-in rounds is going to be "nearly" as lucrative as the current Tourney?

Where is the hype in that? There is no bubble ... almost no Bracketology other than which are the eight biggest losers of the year having a 50:50 shot and which are the less big losers having a straight ticket to the Dance.

This is taking the devaluing of regular season games and actually making them of as little value as cynics claim for them presently ... but since it will be an actual devaluation, it will be reflected in the media value of those regular season games dropping as well.

Quote: Certainly there would be some very good programs left out, just as there are some pretty good football programs that don't make the cut. In time, the lack of resources for the schools left behind would probably render them weaker in all sports than they are today. They would still have a viable football playoff and NCAAT. They just wouldn't pay them very much. And they would still get on TV - just not on the prime channels and best time slots.

But the good programs left out means several years of contested national championships before the brand power of the omitted programs fades, which reduces the media value of the Tourney. All the people filling out brackets for their office pool and then watching games to see how their bracket is doing are not going to suddenly switch to the breakaway, especially since the NCAA bracket will in many ways be the more interesting one at the outset.

Which also reduces how lucrative the new Tourney is.

From a purely cold blooded media value perspective, a 36 team breakaway is doing too much injury to the NCAAT goose that laid the golden egg to expect that the it necessarily will be "nearly as lucrative" as the Tourney. It's more of a "try it and maybe it will work" experiment.

And as for the football value side, you can't say you only want the part of the iceberg floating above the ocean, slice it off at the waterline, slide it off the "underwater" part and expect all of it to be sitting above the water. You are going to be making two icebergs, and your new one will be submerging a lot of ice.

The whole exercise involves looking at the media value created by the present system, and assuming that the media value will simply be concentrated if those that have worked their way to the top in the current system will retain the same value after radical changes to a majority of the parts of the present system.

Part of the media value of the big schools in the conferences is the fact that the fans of the medium schools in the conferences tune in to watch them play the big schools.

As of course, as the media value of the teams that emerge as the doormats in the breakaway drops, the media value of playing them will drop.

For the 36 elite programs to retain their status as elite programs, they need to have games to demonstrate that status, and if those games are only with each other, the standing of many of them are going to fade. Which is an offsetting evolution that isn't included in the imagined evolution of value set out above.

(07-07-2021 08:14 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-07-2021 07:40 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-06-2021 10:36 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-06-2021 06:56 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I still believe the Top 16 schools that make all the money need to break away and keep it. ...

However, some substantial share of the money "they make" is money they make playing schools not in the top 16, since fans of the other schools "have to" watch the game against the top 16 school ... whether in hopes of the upset or not.

And operating minor league finishing school operations for the NFL and NBA is an intrinsically volatile process, and the fact that each conference is won by somebody every year means that the per school value of the rights to show the conference race is higher than the average of the rights to show an individual school, when properly discounted for the volatility.

Plus, the biggest pile of media revenue the power conferences do not get is the majority of the value of the NCAA Basketball tournament that goes to subsidize the NCAA ... and 16 is way to small to support a breakaway basketball tournament that has the brand power of the unquestioned top collegiate basketball tournament in the country.

Something like 48 football/basketball schools and an additional 12 basketball specialist schools seems like it would be a more effective money spinner than a top 16, which implies that the 10th best team in the country is likely to have a losing record.

The 36 team breakaway I proposed would include all the schools considered by most to be the basketball bluebloods, and at least 10 national champions. They could easily have their own tournament with an 8 team playin round and round of 32 in the first week. That tournament would be almost as lucrative as the current NCAAT, just split among 36 schools instead of 350.

36 teams with four knocked out in a play-in rounds is going to be "nearly" as lucrative as the current Tourney?

Where is the hype in that? There is no bubble ... almost no Bracketology other than which are the eight biggest losers of the year having a 50:50 shot and which are the less big losers having a straight ticket to the Dance.

This is taking the devaluing of regular season games and actually making them of as little value as cynics claim for them presently ... but since it will be an actual devaluation, it will be reflected in the media value of those regular season games dropping as well.

Quote: Certainly there would be some very good programs left out, just as there are some pretty good football programs that don't make the cut. In time, the lack of resources for the schools left behind would probably render them weaker in all sports than they are today. They would still have a viable football playoff and NCAAT. They just wouldn't pay them very much. And they would still get on TV - just not on the prime channels and best time slots.

But the good programs left out means several years of contested national championships before the brand power of the omitted programs fades, which reduces the media value of the Tourney. All the people filling out brackets for their office pool and then watching games to see how their bracket is doing are not going to suddenly switch to the breakaway, especially since the NCAA bracket will in many ways be the more interesting one at the outset.

Which also reduces how lucrative the new Tourney is.

From a purely cold blooded media value perspective, a 36 team breakaway is doing too much injury to the NCAAT goose that laid the golden egg to expect that the it necessarily will be "nearly as lucrative" as the Tourney. It's more of a "try it and maybe it will work" experiment.

And as for the football value side, you can't say you only want the part of the iceberg floating above the ocean, slice it off at the waterline, slide it off the "underwater" part and expect all of it to be sitting above the water. You are going to be making two icebergs, and your new one will be submerging a lot of ice.

The whole exercise involves looking at the media value created by the present system, and assuming that the media value will simply be concentrated if those that have worked their way to the top in the current system will retain the same value after radical changes to a majority of the parts of the present system.

Part of the media value of the big schools in the conferences is the fact that the fans of the medium schools in the conferences tune in to watch them play the big schools.

As of course, as the media value of the teams that emerge as the doormats in the breakaway drops, the media value of playing them will drop.

For the 36 elite programs to retain their status as elite programs, they need to have games to demonstrate that status, and if those games are only with each other, the standing of many of them are going to fade. Which is an offsetting evolution that isn't included in the imagined evolution of value set out above.

Keep in mind here that we are talking about a world in which Congress has radically altered the economics of college sports through changes in the amateur model for colleges. Some schools will likely retain some semblance of the current model in which there is no true "pay for play", while the behemoths of college sports could become more professional than semipro.

Ratings for games before the Round of 32 in the current NCAAT are pretty modest. That's especially true for most of the games involving the potential Cinderellas, who only draw significant numbers of eyeballs when they show signs of an upset in the making. My expectation in Future World is that the number of teams in the NCAAT would be reduced - maybe to as low as 32. I would also assume the winner would be crowned NCAA Champion, as the behemoths are no longer members.

In the professional CCT, the games in the Round of 32 would all have the potential for upsets, regardless of the W-L records of the lower seeds. The biggest question in my mind is how the market for eyeballs will play out for the competing Sweet Sixteens in the second week. The NCAAT could include teams like Arizona, Gonzaga, Indiana, Maryland, Syracuse and Villanova. The CCT would likely have UCLA, Kansas, Michigan, Louisville, Kentucky, Florida, Michigan State, Duke, UNC and Virginia. The latter would probably have a lot more lottery picks in the lineup, though I believe one-and-done might be a thing of the past in Future World.

However the economics shake out (and at this point it would be purely guesswork) I believe there exists the potential that the wealthiest programs would break away from the NCAA rather than share the wealth with others, just because they can. My hypothetical just supposes that the schools involved would be the ones with the most resources already. I have no way of knowing which schools would choose to go full professional and which will elect to compete against their peers at a lower, less lucrative level.