(04-08-2024 01:12 PM)3DogNight Wrote:  

(04-08-2024 10:03 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 08:32 PM)3DogNight Wrote:  I know that less is best for you, but to insinuate that an 8 team conference would be just as or more appealing to the networks is laughable.

Why the heck would CBSSN care about the games they aren't airing? They just end up streaming (and ESPN+ has all the content they need for that).


As long as they can get enough games to cover whatever it is they want covered - it's the same difference to them.

The point of my 4 team vs 25 team analogy was the principle, but I can make a different version if you're lost in the details.

Imagine an 8 team G5 conference and a 32 team G5 conference. Each gets a tv deal for 20 over-the-air games. Who makes more money on the deal? As long as you can fit the games in on the schedule, no network would care (much) even about which teams they're showing. It's just filler for them. Even repeating teams isn't going to matter, they're not trying to get every team on tv unless that's part of the contract that the conference fought for (or it's necessary for the schedules to work).

More inventory just means a bigger denominator.

Exactly! Why would they even attempt to carry any games from a paltry 8 team conference when they can get what they need from the 14 team conferences.
Your analogy is flawed. Again, why would they even care about the 8 team G5, when they have a 32 team G5 to pick from. The little 8 team conference would be left out in the cold. You might have a smaller pie, but nothing from nothing leaves nothing. It doesn’t matter that you don’t have as many mouths to feed when you’re not getting anything to feed those mouths. I understand that smaller is more profitable in your opinion. I just don’t agree with that. I think that 12 is a good number. I guess we can agree to disagree on this matter.

No, that's not how numbers work.

If you need to show, just to pick a not-completely-random example, say, 21 games on linear tv in a season - you only need to have available 21 games.

An 8 team league plays 56 conference games (plus however many home OOC games). So CBS/ESPN can easily find 21 out of those 56 to show. The 14 team league has way more games, but once you hit 21 it doesn't matter.

Last season the 9-team CUSA had 21 home games planned for over the air tv. But we had like 72 total. Do you know what did not matter at all to the tv deal? The other 51 games! And why would they? Why would ESPN care that more games were being played (but not aired by them)? They stream most of them, but they don't care about that. A 14 team league just has more games not being aired. So what?


If I am going to contract with you for 10 widgets, what do I care if you make 100 or 1,000. I only want 10 either way. But it ought to matter to you whether you're spending the money to make an extra 90 widgets vs an extra 990. Because you're just throwing that extra money away.

(04-07-2024 07:22 AM)DrDocMartin Wrote:  Seems like the "case for 11" thread is slowly turning into the "if we don't get Missouri State stay at 11" thread. I believe that we will most likely add Missouri State, and I do like them, I just don't see the need for a rush. Do we believe that the Sun Belt is going to swoop in and steal them away? If CUSA football has a couple more years like this past year, the conference should be able to add a team with less of a financial penalty for all of the teams already in the conference.

I thought we would add them but it seems that the interest there has ended and we are full at 14. Still it shows how the overlap between our conferences is a little wild though.

(04-08-2024 02:18 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(04-08-2024 01:12 PM)3DogNight Wrote:  

(04-08-2024 10:03 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 08:32 PM)3DogNight Wrote:  I know that less is best for you, but to insinuate that an 8 team conference would be just as or more appealing to the networks is laughable.

Why the heck would CBSSN care about the games they aren't airing? They just end up streaming (and ESPN+ has all the content they need for that).


As long as they can get enough games to cover whatever it is they want covered - it's the same difference to them.

The point of my 4 team vs 25 team analogy was the principle, but I can make a different version if you're lost in the details.

Imagine an 8 team G5 conference and a 32 team G5 conference. Each gets a tv deal for 20 over-the-air games. Who makes more money on the deal? As long as you can fit the games in on the schedule, no network would care (much) even about which teams they're showing. It's just filler for them. Even repeating teams isn't going to matter, they're not trying to get every team on tv unless that's part of the contract that the conference fought for (or it's necessary for the schedules to work).

More inventory just means a bigger denominator.

Exactly! Why would they even attempt to carry any games from a paltry 8 team conference when they can get what they need from the 14 team conferences.
Your analogy is flawed. Again, why would they even care about the 8 team G5, when they have a 32 team G5 to pick from. The little 8 team conference would be left out in the cold. You might have a smaller pie, but nothing from nothing leaves nothing. It doesn’t matter that you don’t have as many mouths to feed when you’re not getting anything to feed those mouths. I understand that smaller is more profitable in your opinion. I just don’t agree with that. I think that 12 is a good number. I guess we can agree to disagree on this matter.

No, that's not how numbers work.

If you need to show, just to pick a not-completely-random example, say, 21 games on linear tv in a season - you only need to have available 21 games.

An 8 team league plays 56 conference games (plus however many home OOC games). So CBS/ESPN can easily find 21 out of those 56 to show. The 14 team league has way more games, but once you hit 21 it doesn't matter.

Last season the 9-team CUSA had 21 home games planned for over the air tv. But we had like 72 total. Do you know what did not matter at all to the tv deal? The other 51 games! And why would they? Why would ESPN care that more games were being played (but not aired by them)? They stream most of them, but they don't care about that. A 14 team league just has more games not being aired. So what?


If I am going to contract with you for 10 widgets, what do I care if you make 100 or 1,000. I only want 10 either way. But it ought to matter to you whether you're spending the money to make an extra 90 widgets vs an extra 990. Because you're just throwing that extra money away.

I agree. If an increase in inventory was important to our media partners they would have granted us a pro rate clause to allow us to expand to the number they desired.

(04-08-2024 03:08 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(04-07-2024 07:22 AM)DrDocMartin Wrote:  Seems like the "case for 11" thread is slowly turning into the "if we don't get Missouri State stay at 11" thread. I believe that we will most likely add Missouri State, and I do like them, I just don't see the need for a rush. Do we believe that the Sun Belt is going to swoop in and steal them away? If CUSA football has a couple more years like this past year, the conference should be able to add a team with less of a financial penalty for all of the teams already in the conference.

I thought we would add them but it seems that the interest there has ended and we are full at 14. Still it shows how the overlap between our conferences is a little wild though.

Completely agree. The Sun Belt looks good with the teams that it has, everyone seems to have a natural rival and most of the games are close enough to allow the fans to travel. Hopefully in the near future CUSA will develop it's conference relationships in a similar manner and have a full slate of games the fans care about. That takes time, we will get there.

I really think we should go to 12 only if Missouri St is coming. There is a lot of shuffling coming and I would rather be in a position to grab people trying to jump ship. The AAC and WAC are likely candidates for a collapse. I think we could be in a position down the road to get some teams left behind like the SBC did.

If the AAC collapses somehow I could totally see a reshuffling between the SBC and AAC with the western parts of those conferences separating from the eastern parts of those conferences. Let's say the eastern one keeps the SBC name and the western one keeping the AAC name.

New SBC:
App
JMU
ODU
Marshall
ECU
GSU
GS
CCU
FAU
Temple
Navy
USF

New AAC:
UTSA
Rice
UNT
TXST
Tulsa
ULL
Tulane
USM
Troy
UAB
USA
stAte
Memphis

ULM and Charlotte get left behind.

(04-11-2024 12:45 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  If the AAC collapses somehow I could totally see a reshuffling between the SBC and AAC with the western parts of those conferences separating from the eastern parts of those conferences. Let's say the eastern one keeps the SBC name and the western one keeping the AAC name.

New SBC:
App
JMU
ODU
Marshall
ECU
GSU
GS
CCU
FAU
Temple
Navy
USF

New AAC:
UTSA
Rice
UNT
TXST
Tulsa
ULL
Tulane
USM
Troy
UAB
USA
stAte
Memphis

ULM and Charlotte get left behind.

So in this hypothetical, I assume CUSA is happy to take Charlotte as 12 and ulm has to go indy? R

(04-11-2024 01:39 PM)Hootyhoo Wrote:  

(04-11-2024 12:45 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  If the AAC collapses somehow I could totally see a reshuffling between the SBC and AAC with the western parts of those conferences separating from the eastern parts of those conferences. Let's say the eastern one keeps the SBC name and the western one keeping the AAC name.

New SBC:
App
JMU
ODU
Marshall
ECU
GSU
GS
CCU
FAU
Temple
Navy
USF

New AAC:
UTSA
Rice
UNT
TXST
Tulsa
ULL
Tulane
USM
Troy
UAB
USA
stAte
Memphis

ULM and Charlotte get left behind.

So in this hypothetical, I assume CUSA is happy to take Charlotte as 12 and ulm has to go indy? R

Well if this happens I'd guess it would be a few years from now so y'all would probably already have 12. Maybe y'all take both to get to 14?

Honestly I just miscounted the new AAC though. I'd bet they'd let ULM instead of having 13.

(04-11-2024 12:45 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  If the AAC collapses somehow I could totally see a reshuffling between the SBC and AAC with the western parts of those conferences separating from the eastern parts of those conferences. Let's say the eastern one keeps the SBC name and the western one keeping the AAC name.

New SBC:
App
JMU
ODU
Marshall
ECU
Charlotte
GSU
GS
CCU
FAU
Temple
Navy
Army
USF

New AAC:
UTSA
Rice
UNT
TXST
Tulsa
ULM
ULL
Tulane
USM
Troy
UAB
USA
stAte
Memphis

ULM and Charlotte don't get left behind.

I just don't see how this happens unless neither conference is worth more than the other to anyone. Even then the MWC could leverage that fall into getting teams from the state of Texas if they wanted unless they too cease to be greater in value.

I don't see the American and the Sun Belt merging. They're apples and oranges. Oil and water. One's sold out for urban campuses and big media markets. The other has bought into fan bases and regional rivalries.

I also believe Memphis, USF, and Tulane (along with UConn) could potentially be ACC bound, if the lawsuits and/or GoR ever end and the power teams are able to make their getaway.

This would prompt the AAC to poach Ga State. I think they'd stop there, bringing them to an even 12 teams. They could add Texas State, but then they'd have to find a 14th team, and there's just not anyone else out there who fits the AAC's profile.

From then, any geography-based realignment would have to be done with CUSA:

NEW EASTERN CONFERENCE - 14 teams, 2 divisions

Northeast Division - 7 teams
Delaware
Liberty
App State
JMU
ODU
Marshall
CCU

Southwest Division - 7 teams
Kennesaw State
Ga Southern
FIU
MTSU
WKU
Jax State
troy state

NEW WESTERN CONFERENCE - 11 teams, no divisions
South Alabama
Southern Miss
ULL
ULM
La Tech
SHSU
Texas State
NMSU
UTEP
Ark State
Mo State (from FCS)

Chances of the ACC poaching some AAC teams if the GoR is broken: 85%
Chances of the AAC backfilling with 1-2 SBC teams if this happens: 100%
Chances of the SBC and CUSA merging under any circumstances: 0.0037%

The AAC (AMERICAN) is Not going anywhere. They will Not be picked apart by Any G5 league.

They have money coming in [Largest G5 media deal Plus a Ton of NCAA credits].

They have a LARGE amount already in the "bank" (assets) plus the Huge buyouts they would get should anyone depart.

Even IF they lose two--they would still be at twelve (FB) and would not "have to" add anyone.

%%%%%%%%%%%***********#####################

The ACC will have SEVENTEEN Teams Plus Notre Dame (2024-25).

Even if they lost 2 teams--they would only need one to get back to 16 (plus ND).

Now if you believe all this "doomsday" theory talk about them losing 4-6 teams--then, of course all bets are off.

BUT---At that point you are basing your "dominoes" on something that is less likely IMO.

CUSA is fine at 11. If Missouri State joins, great. If WKU leaves for the MAC, it will sting a bit. Then if the CUSA leaders want 12, then Tarleton State for 12. But agree with Inutech, then 10 would be better.

(04-11-2024 06:32 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  The AAC (AMERICAN) is Not going anywhere. They will Not be picked apart by Any G5 league.

(snip)

The ACC will have SEVENTEEN Teams Plus Notre Dame (2024-25).

Even if they lost 2 teams--they would only need one to get back to 16 (plus ND).

Now if you believe all this "doomsday" theory talk about them losing 4-6 teams--then, of course all bets are off.

BUT---At that point you are basing your "dominoes" on something that is less likely IMO.

I agree 100% about the American. They're not going to find themselves in a "poach or die" situation under any realistic scenario for years to come.

I *do* think it's quite possible the ACC could lose several of their premier teams. Clemson and FSU are definites. UNC has been mentioned a lot. And Miami (and their market) could be attractive to somebody.

But they'd still have Duke, NC State, Louisville, and (for now, in OLY sports) Notre Dame, among others. Would it be a greatly diminished conference? Absolutely. Would it be dead as a Power Greed conference? No. It'd have much stronger legs remaining on it than the 2PAC.

As a Power Greed conference, they might be motivated to expand back to 14 or even 16. But no matter how I draw it up, this doesn't filter down to the Sun Belt, MAC, or CUSA in any meaningful way.

The only team I see moving as a result of it would be Georgia State (Atlanta market; fits AAC profile; would provide a travel partner for UAB). You could make a case for Texas State as well, should they opt to expand back that far. But I see no benefit for them to move to 13 teams versus 12, and I certainly see no need for a G5 conference -- even the top G5 -- to expand to 14.

The Belt could add a team to replace the Panthers, but I don't know how motivated they'd be to do that. As with the AAC, it'd be another mouth to feed with no real benefit.

This is with FOUR teams changing conferences as a result of teams leaving the ACC.

And I'm not even sure all of those four would actually have somewhere to go.

Short of some major move from the P2, it looks like the ACC realignment will be relatively quiet, and the 2PAC/MWC "non-merger" will continue to "not merge" for a couple years more.

As for CUSA, we'll either add Mo State to get to 12, or we'll continue to argue the Case for 11 for perpetuity. I don't think anything's going to shake us up too much for quite some time.

(04-12-2024 11:23 AM)whupemall Wrote:  

(04-11-2024 06:32 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  The AAC (AMERICAN) is Not going anywhere. They will Not be picked apart by Any G5 league.

(snip)

The ACC will have SEVENTEEN Teams Plus Notre Dame (2024-25).

Even if they lost 2 teams--they would only need one to get back to 16 (plus ND).

Now if you believe all this "doomsday" theory talk about them losing 4-6 teams--then, of course all bets are off.

BUT---At that point you are basing your "dominoes" on something that is less likely IMO.

I agree 100% about the American. They're not going to find themselves in a "poach or die" situation under any realistic scenario for years to come.

I *do* think it's quite possible the ACC could lose several of their premier teams. Clemson and FSU are definites. UNC has been mentioned a lot. And Miami (and their market) could be attractive to somebody.

But they'd still have Duke, NC State, Louisville, and (for now, in OLY sports) Notre Dame, among others. Would it be a greatly diminished conference? Absolutely. Would it be dead as a Power Greed conference? No. It'd have much stronger legs remaining on it than the 2PAC.

As a Power Greed conference, they might be motivated to expand back to 14 or even 16. But no matter how I draw it up, this doesn't filter down to the Sun Belt, MAC, or CUSA in any meaningful way.

The only team I see moving as a result of it would be Georgia State (Atlanta market; fits AAC profile; would provide a travel partner for UAB). You could make a case for Texas State as well, should they opt to expand back that far. But I see no benefit for them to move to 13 teams versus 12, and I certainly see no need for a G5 conference -- even the top G5 -- to expand to 14.

The Belt could add a team to replace the Panthers, but I don't know how motivated they'd be to do that. As with the AAC, it'd be another mouth to feed with no real benefit.

This is with FOUR teams changing conferences as a result of teams leaving the ACC.

And I'm not even sure all of those four would actually have somewhere to go.

Short of some major move from the P2, it looks like the ACC realignment will be relatively quiet, and the 2PAC/MWC "non-merger" will continue to "not merge" for a couple years more.

As for CUSA, we'll either add Mo State to get to 12, or we'll continue to argue the Case for 11 for perpetuity. I don't think anything's going to shake us up too much for quite some time.

The "Power Greed" conferences are looking for a new tagline. One writer has suggested the "Core Four" and I am hoping that one sticks.... "The Corrupt Four" has a pleasant ring to it don't ya think?

(04-16-2024 08:47 AM)DrDocMartin Wrote:  

(04-12-2024 11:23 AM)whupemall Wrote:  

(04-11-2024 06:32 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  The AAC (AMERICAN) is Not going anywhere. They will Not be picked apart by Any G5 league.

(snip)

The ACC will have SEVENTEEN Teams Plus Notre Dame (2024-25).

Even if they lost 2 teams--they would only need one to get back to 16 (plus ND).

Now if you believe all this "doomsday" theory talk about them losing 4-6 teams--then, of course all bets are off.

BUT---At that point you are basing your "dominoes" on something that is less likely IMO.

I agree 100% about the American. They're not going to find themselves in a "poach or die" situation under any realistic scenario for years to come.

I *do* think it's quite possible the ACC could lose several of their premier teams. Clemson and FSU are definites. UNC has been mentioned a lot. And Miami (and their market) could be attractive to somebody.

But they'd still have Duke, NC State, Louisville, and (for now, in OLY sports) Notre Dame, among others. Would it be a greatly diminished conference? Absolutely. Would it be dead as a Power Greed conference? No. It'd have much stronger legs remaining on it than the 2PAC.

As a Power Greed conference, they might be motivated to expand back to 14 or even 16. But no matter how I draw it up, this doesn't filter down to the Sun Belt, MAC, or CUSA in any meaningful way.

The only team I see moving as a result of it would be Georgia State (Atlanta market; fits AAC profile; would provide a travel partner for UAB). You could make a case for Texas State as well, should they opt to expand back that far. But I see no benefit for them to move to 13 teams versus 12, and I certainly see no need for a G5 conference -- even the top G5 -- to expand to 14.

The Belt could add a team to replace the Panthers, but I don't know how motivated they'd be to do that. As with the AAC, it'd be another mouth to feed with no real benefit.

This is with FOUR teams changing conferences as a result of teams leaving the ACC.

And I'm not even sure all of those four would actually have somewhere to go.

Short of some major move from the P2, it looks like the ACC realignment will be relatively quiet, and the 2PAC/MWC "non-merger" will continue to "not merge" for a couple years more.

As for CUSA, we'll either add Mo State to get to 12, or we'll continue to argue the Case for 11 for perpetuity. I don't think anything's going to shake us up too much for quite some time.

The "Power Greed" conferences are looking for a new tagline. One writer has suggested the "Core Four" and I am hoping that one sticks.... "The Corrupt Four" has a pleasant ring to it don't ya think?

Only problem is there really is only two not four. The ACC and B12 are not on the same level as the SEC and BIG.

(04-16-2024 09:03 PM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 08:47 AM)DrDocMartin Wrote:  

(04-12-2024 11:23 AM)whupemall Wrote:  

(04-11-2024 06:32 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  The AAC (AMERICAN) is Not going anywhere. They will Not be picked apart by Any G5 league.

(snip)

The ACC will have SEVENTEEN Teams Plus Notre Dame (2024-25).

Even if they lost 2 teams--they would only need one to get back to 16 (plus ND).

Now if you believe all this "doomsday" theory talk about them losing 4-6 teams--then, of course all bets are off.

BUT---At that point you are basing your "dominoes" on something that is less likely IMO.

I agree 100% about the American. They're not going to find themselves in a "poach or die" situation under any realistic scenario for years to come.

I *do* think it's quite possible the ACC could lose several of their premier teams. Clemson and FSU are definites. UNC has been mentioned a lot. And Miami (and their market) could be attractive to somebody.

But they'd still have Duke, NC State, Louisville, and (for now, in OLY sports) Notre Dame, among others. Would it be a greatly diminished conference? Absolutely. Would it be dead as a Power Greed conference? No. It'd have much stronger legs remaining on it than the 2PAC.

As a Power Greed conference, they might be motivated to expand back to 14 or even 16. But no matter how I draw it up, this doesn't filter down to the Sun Belt, MAC, or CUSA in any meaningful way.

The only team I see moving as a result of it would be Georgia State (Atlanta market; fits AAC profile; would provide a travel partner for UAB). You could make a case for Texas State as well, should they opt to expand back that far. But I see no benefit for them to move to 13 teams versus 12, and I certainly see no need for a G5 conference -- even the top G5 -- to expand to 14.

The Belt could add a team to replace the Panthers, but I don't know how motivated they'd be to do that. As with the AAC, it'd be another mouth to feed with no real benefit.

This is with FOUR teams changing conferences as a result of teams leaving the ACC.

And I'm not even sure all of those four would actually have somewhere to go.

Short of some major move from the P2, it looks like the ACC realignment will be relatively quiet, and the 2PAC/MWC "non-merger" will continue to "not merge" for a couple years more.

As for CUSA, we'll either add Mo State to get to 12, or we'll continue to argue the Case for 11 for perpetuity. I don't think anything's going to shake us up too much for quite some time.

The "Power Greed" conferences are looking for a new tagline. One writer has suggested the "Core Four" and I am hoping that one sticks.... "The Corrupt Four" has a pleasant ring to it don't ya think?

Only problem is there really is only two not four. The ACC and B12 are not on the same level as the SEC and BIG.

That is why they are dropping the "Power" label. The new one is supposed to convey there are four main conferences without suggesting that they are equal... Cuz they're not. URL to article: https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-fo...r5-core-4/

The rumor of Tarleton State being number 12 is a pretty solid reason for staying at 11. Shouldn't we at least wait until they have proven they can win consistently and fill a stadium at the FCS level?

To be clear, I put no actual stock in Tarleton being the next add. I believe Missouri State and Eastern Kentucky are both easily ahead of them, and it wouldn't surprise me if Central Arkansas and some other college from the grassy knoll were as well.

The best option to me is to wait. Big changes are likely coming so it would seem prudent to figure out what that possible future looks like first before marrying ourselves to another team.

11 is great

12 w Missouri St is great

12 w any other non-Dakota FCS call-up reeks of desperation

(04-25-2024 11:07 AM)Keswick_Crusaders_Forever51 Wrote:  11 is great

12 w Missouri St is great

12 w any other non-Dakota FCS call-up reeks of desperation

WHAT? No McNeese St. with their grea$t Basketball ? (Just Kidding).

(04-25-2024 11:07 AM)Keswick_Crusaders_Forever51 Wrote:  11 is great

12 w Missouri St is great

12 w any other non-Dakota FCS call-up reeks of desperation

I don't think 11 is great.

11 is what we have. We're probably stuck with that (short of losing someone, which would typically but not exclusively be worse than not losing someone, depending on the circumstances).

So I'd say:

11 is what we have.

12 w Missouri State is worse than that.

12 w anyone else is also worse than 11, but arguably even more worse than 12 with Missouri State. Probably? Maybe? A little? We think?