(04-05-2024 08:32 PM)JMaddy Wrote:  

(04-05-2024 03:04 PM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(04-05-2024 02:25 PM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  Another part of this idea that will not happen yet is the uneven distribution even among the permanent 70 schools. Can't imagine Vanderbilt, Oregon State, Stanford, etc. are going to be okay with losing some of their money so Alabama and Notre Dame can get a larger share just because they happen to be good now. What happens if Stanford hits their Harbaugh era prime and Alabama hits their Mike Shula low? Will payouts be recalculated? Is permanent promotion worth the ever widening gap between you and your division mates?

This particular scheme is never getting off the ground. But there will be others, and hopefully they get better.

i'm not opposed to the idea, although I don't like the G5 having no chance to move "up" to join one of the top 7 divisions.... but overall, I'm on board. It's infinitely better than the **** show going on right now.

As for allocating the money, if you are going to go all Premier League on this plan, then you break up the money the same way they do.
the PL makes BILLIONS from worldwide TV money. But that money is allocated in 3 ways.

1) Everyone gets an equal share (33% of the total - I'm sure the G5 share will be les, but it would be a fixed amount)

2) You get paid for being on TV, with everyone guaranteed a certain amount of appearances. You'd have to base this on the prime main TV broadcast slots (noon/330/700/1000 - one for each broadcasting window), because every game is on TV, but that's easily worked out (33% of the total - or maybe a lesser share here and more in the other two areas)

3) the last and most equitable share is based on merit. The PL Champions get more of this 3rd of the pie than the team that finishes in last. the higher up the "table" you finish, the more of the merit share you get. So obviously the teams in the playoff get more, but at the same time, it creates incentives for EVERYONE to play out the season and try and finish "higher" on the merit table to earn more money for your program. (34% of the total)

if Stanford out performs Alabama for a period of years, they'll get more of the big pot. Over time though, Alabama will "earn" far more than Stanford as they'll likely be on TV more and likely perform better in the long haul. But at least this gives a Stanford or Syracuse or Missouri a shot to win AND earn big when they are having a good spell.

as a huge fan of the PL and European soccer, i'm not opposed to this plan at all.
i initially became a huge PL fan because it is the European cousin to college sports. Very tribal fan bases and very passionate. Just like college football. that's what drew me to it over a decade ago and it's become my second favorite sport after college football. The two are kindred spirits.

I like this model as well, but I think that they need to make it full on Pro/Rel like in European soccer. Maybe protect the big boys for a period of time (say 10 years) but eventually if the bottom 8 schools in any given year include current P4 schools and a JMU or Tulane or Fresno for example finish above the Relegation line they should be allowed to continue to stay up.

Eventually in the Euro model the biggest and best will 'always' remain up, yes there can be that once in a generation time where they go down (Juventus or Rangers come to mind recently) so the teams with the lower budget will eventually always end up being the ones that are bouncing up and down but at least it gives them an equal shot to stay up for a prolonged period.

Going back to the EPL example, Blackburn (who actually won the first PL title) had a long run in the PL but then dropped down and haven't recovered, same for Portsmouth and Southhampton, while a Brighton Hove and Ablion, and Wolverhampton were long bouncing around between League One, Championship and the PL and have been pretty solidly established in the upper tier of the PL for the last few years.

Juve and Rangers didn't go down on merit though. they went down for sanctions because of cheating.

but to your point, that can help curb cheating. the threat of relegation and the lost revenue that comes with that can be a very powerful incentive to not cheat. Or at least to cover it up extremely well.

(04-06-2024 07:31 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(04-05-2024 08:32 PM)JMaddy Wrote:  

(04-05-2024 03:04 PM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(04-05-2024 02:25 PM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  Another part of this idea that will not happen yet is the uneven distribution even among the permanent 70 schools. Can't imagine Vanderbilt, Oregon State, Stanford, etc. are going to be okay with losing some of their money so Alabama and Notre Dame can get a larger share just because they happen to be good now. What happens if Stanford hits their Harbaugh era prime and Alabama hits their Mike Shula low? Will payouts be recalculated? Is permanent promotion worth the ever widening gap between you and your division mates?

This particular scheme is never getting off the ground. But there will be others, and hopefully they get better.

i'm not opposed to the idea, although I don't like the G5 having no chance to move "up" to join one of the top 7 divisions.... but overall, I'm on board. It's infinitely better than the **** show going on right now.

As for allocating the money, if you are going to go all Premier League on this plan, then you break up the money the same way they do.
the PL makes BILLIONS from worldwide TV money. But that money is allocated in 3 ways.

1) Everyone gets an equal share (33% of the total - I'm sure the G5 share will be les, but it would be a fixed amount)

2) You get paid for being on TV, with everyone guaranteed a certain amount of appearances. You'd have to base this on the prime main TV broadcast slots (noon/330/700/1000 - one for each broadcasting window), because every game is on TV, but that's easily worked out (33% of the total - or maybe a lesser share here and more in the other two areas)

3) the last and most equitable share is based on merit. The PL Champions get more of this 3rd of the pie than the team that finishes in last. the higher up the "table" you finish, the more of the merit share you get. So obviously the teams in the playoff get more, but at the same time, it creates incentives for EVERYONE to play out the season and try and finish "higher" on the merit table to earn more money for your program. (34% of the total)

if Stanford out performs Alabama for a period of years, they'll get more of the big pot. Over time though, Alabama will "earn" far more than Stanford as they'll likely be on TV more and likely perform better in the long haul. But at least this gives a Stanford or Syracuse or Missouri a shot to win AND earn big when they are having a good spell.

as a huge fan of the PL and European soccer, i'm not opposed to this plan at all.
i initially became a huge PL fan because it is the European cousin to college sports. Very tribal fan bases and very passionate. Just like college football. that's what drew me to it over a decade ago and it's become my second favorite sport after college football. The two are kindred spirits.

I like this model as well, but I think that they need to make it full on Pro/Rel like in European soccer. Maybe protect the big boys for a period of time (say 10 years) but eventually if the bottom 8 schools in any given year include current P4 schools and a JMU or Tulane or Fresno for example finish above the Relegation line they should be allowed to continue to stay up.

Eventually in the Euro model the biggest and best will 'always' remain up, yes there can be that once in a generation time where they go down (Juventus or Rangers come to mind recently) so the teams with the lower budget will eventually always end up being the ones that are bouncing up and down but at least it gives them an equal shot to stay up for a prolonged period.

Going back to the EPL example, Blackburn (who actually won the first PL title) had a long run in the PL but then dropped down and haven't recovered, same for Portsmouth and Southhampton, while a Brighton Hove and Ablion, and Wolverhampton were long bouncing around between League One, Championship and the PL and have been pretty solidly established in the upper tier of the PL for the last few years.

Juve and Rangers didn't go down on merit though. they went down for sanctions because of cheating.

but to your point, that can help curb cheating. the threat of relegation and the lost revenue that comes with that can be a very powerful incentive to not cheat. Or at least to cover it up extremely well.

Right yeah I was being lazy with some big names, I guess Newcastle, West Ham, Shalke or Leeds would be good 'recent' examples of big time clubs being sent down on performance.