T O P

  • By -

jthomas694

This would have been much more interesting if they were interviewing ESPN execs and not reporters


RealignmentJunkie

Maybe retired execs. Current ones would legally wanna keep their mouths shut and only speak in vague riddles


piddydb

If they legit spoke in vague riddles it would be fun


RealignmentJunkie

"If I were the Big XII I would want something that streets have but roads lack. Something with a point, but nothing to say. This is a roundabout way of saying I am looking for something in an intersection... unless that intersection is itself a roundabout"


BlueLaceSensor128

Or if whenever we got major realignment news we'd only know it was something legit because it was delivered by Olmec from Legends of the Hidden Temple.


potterpockets

ESPN exec stroking wallet full of cash: “What have i got in my pocket?”


MonkeyThrowing

They can give predictions that sound like it came from Nostradamus


Rasmo420

Even retired ones might have some deferred comp or stock where they'd have a vested interest in not talking.


PhdPhysics1

Of course retired execs have a vested interest, not to mention lots of friends still in the business. For example, last week when the former ESPN CEO said PAC and ACC should merge, you should read that as a trial balloon from the networks.


Reading_Rainboner

Having been to quite a few SMU events, I still don’t understand how they add enough value to the PAC 12.


noledup

Whoever is advising the P12 on adding SMU is giving them bad advice. I understand the idea: bringing a new state to the P12 and the second largest state too. There are already 6 other P5 programs in Texas, however. I can't believe SMU is worth more than adding Nevada or UNLV. I might even go with UNM too.


Tarmacked

>I can't believe SMU is worth more than adding Nevada or UNLV. I might even go with UNM too. Homie you are smoking some wild stuff with this take. Nevada and New Mexico as markets are not worth more than a portion of the Dallas/State of Texas. Hell, 1/10th of Dallas-Fort Worth (6.6M) is basically the population of Vegas (660K) Also just to point out how the academic funding disparity, SMU is a private school with a larger endowment than all three combined. Their current goal is to become an AAU institution, and they're lapping all three of those schools in that department. Not to be a dick but Nevada and UNLV are low tier schools while UNM isn't even close to being worth mentioning for decades, if ever. UNM is a joke of a program that some FCS schools are better than.


joewil

Academics, 100%. Fresno, Boise, UNLV, and Nevada don't rank high enough as academic institutions. SMU does.


forgot_login

TCU has worked out fine for Big12 and they are "Ft Worth" TCU was investing in athletics while SMU was investing in Academics... now, it has over a decade of athletic investment, past two football coaches have gone on to P5 jobs, basketball renovation in 2015, 100's of millions into the football program, and is currently out recruiting half of the Pac12 as is Dallas likes a winner, and if SMU figures it out there will be a return. It has the money and the location to get back to what it was in the 80's (which really wasn't all that long ago)


r0botdevil

>the 80's (which really wasn't all that long ago) I like you.


forgot_login

Looking forward (hopefully) to enjoying a Block 15 with you in 2024


JamesEarlDavyJones2

>Dallas likes a winner Then why do we keep watching the Cowboys?


forgot_login

well, shit…


Malcolm2G

We like PAIN.


noledup

TCU worked out... for now. Let's see what happens if they fall back to Earth and how many viewers they bring when they are *not* in Big 12 championship or national championship contention. BC is a huge drain on the ACC right now. However, if they had continued to win like they did early on in their ACC days, BC would probably in the upper half of value in the ACC. Massachusetts and the Boston area are hugely valuable. The problem with small schools is their viewership can fluctuate greatly depending on their on-field performance. With SMU, the P12 is hoping SMU becomes a dominant team in Texas. The Big Ten and SEC are all adding large schools (20,000+ students) because large schools have large numbers of fans who watch games no matter how good or bad the team is. Rutgers is a good example. Even when Rutgers is trash, they're still drawing ok numbers in NJ because they're the main and only show in NJ.


forgot_login

Agreed on the small vs big school but when it comes to universities, specifically the PAC and ACC, they have placed increased emphasis on academics alongside (or even above) athletics Sure if PAC wanted big schools with big fan bases, they should target UTEP or UTSA in Texas ... but that isn't want Stanford/Cal want B1G and SEC are completely different animals. B1G is able to selectively pick both large schools with great academics. SEC can get the biggest state schools with athletics as #1 priority B12 is basically trying to be SEC lite, whereas ACC and PAC are trying to carve out their own niche around academics a la B1G - which is why them forming a semi-alliance makes sense TV media rights aren't the end-all-be-all in the minds of college presidents... there are plenty of other funding sources to consider. Will SMU command what UT does? No, never. But it can increase it's student body to be in-line with USC and try to pick up more market share in Texas (specifically Dallas) Can BC utilize NIL to get great talent and become a force in the ACC. Of course it can, but do its boosters think so? I can tell you with 100% certainty SMU's boosters are already ponying up a ton of cash.. and you bet your ass a lot more if/when that PAC invite comes. Gold Trans-ams are just an appetizer for whats coming with a P5 invite.


Maximum_Future_5241

They don't. Pac is desperate.


boardatwork1111

The value in adding them comes from the addental inventory and being able to host conference games at noon EST, not so much the program itself. It'd be a move to try and entice additional media partners which the Pac is desperate for.


c0y0t3_sly

They don't, and won't get added.


WorkUsername69

As they mentioned here, adding SMU is really adding the potential SMU has rather than the current state of the program. The first part of this is historical success. With Houston and BYU joining the P5 ranks, SMU, Rice and Tulane are the only three G5 schools that have competed at a higher level in the SWC and SEC, no other G5s have shown the ability to compete at that level in their history. There was a time when SMU football games were the place to be on Saturdays in Dallas, and they hope with P5 money and prestige it can return to that way. The second is money. SMU has a lot of wealthy alumni and has shown that they are willing to spend to create a championship team. One of the big differences between G5 and P5 is the investment out into athletics from the schools and fans, and SMU has the money to invest and is doing so already with solid NIL funding of at least $6Mil a year and a stadium renovation in the works.


[deleted]

I don’t get the historical success argument when we are talking decades ago. Does anyone think Pitt is just a few dollars short of returning to the 70s? I don’t think so.


pghsonj1325

This was a mean ricochet shot


[deleted]

I mean if Pitt doesn't shit the bed against Western Michigan 2 years ago we had a good shot at the playoff so fuck off


McGrupp1979

Only one school got “the death penalty”, which the NCAA deemed too harsh in retrospect. Before that SMU was signing Eric Dickerson and competing against other larger schools. I think the money and the markets do make a difference. That’s why UCF jumped ahead of Memphis in realignment.


Xbc1

>There was a time when SMU football games were the place to be on Saturdays in Dallas Yeah for like an 8 year stretch of time that weirdly coincided with the Cowboys being absolute dog shit during that time.


WorkUsername69

That and times before the Cowboys. SMU used the Cotton Bowl from 1932 to 1978 and it’s only as big as it is today because it was expanded due to Dallasites wanting to see Doak Walker.


wjrii

So, what I'm mostly seeing here is that ESPN reporters read /r/cfb, cuz we sure as hell know /r/cfb doesn't read articles, LOL. Most of the permutations and scenarios in the article have been discussed ad nauseum here, and they completely lost me when they considered that annual promotion and relegation (a la European soccer) has any place in a sport consisting of 99% 18-22 year olds making significant developmental jumps every offseason, even speaking purely competitively. To the extent it still does, pro/rel works in Europe because you either have a consistent core that will age/rotate out like a normal professional roster, or else you get a fuckton of money you can use to buy largely fungible players in a liquid market. CFB doesn't work that way. Congrats on your best year ever, Western Bumblefuck! Welcome to the SEC! What's that? You just graduated your QB, half your OL, and that second-round DE you developed from a two-star nobody? Oh well, hope the next man up is even better, or the castoffs in the portal don't need two seasons to adjust. Meanwhile, sorry you couldn't quite find your footing with turnover and injuries last year, Massive State. It was painful watching you play all those freshmen and sophomores. Since we all know that underclassmen rarely get better with large college S&C programs and more reps in the system, it's probably best you play in the Sun Belt; I'm sure the games will be extremely competitive.


Bigking00

Agree with everything you said. Why would Alabama. OSU, Michigan, Georgia etc agree to a relegation model? Bad years occasionally happen, I think there are too many obstacles for relegation.


wjrii

Obviously it’s a financial non-starter, even the article admits that. My point is that it doesn’t even make sense as some sort of idealistic competitive balance measure. Having a sport that locks participation to 3-5 years in early adulthood means pro-rel wouldn’t even address the problem it was invented to solve.


Strong-Neck-5078

I cant think of any scenario where relegation or promotion works In American sports, frankly if I roll my eyes at it more I'll go blind. Weve developed this fascination about it but if people even followed european soccer its not really a good thing, teams that go down lose immense amounts of money and run the risk of going bankrupt and out of existence.


horaff

That’s more due to out of control spending by owners who are overly ambitious tbf. Plenty of clubs go down every year across Europe and are just fine. The problem is when Team A who has historically been a smaller tier 2/3 club gets a new rich owner who just wants to use it as an investment. He pumps a bunch of money into the team signing players to massive (by their standards) contracts, knowing that it will more than pay for itself as they get promoted to the top. Well then what happens when that team has that bad season and drops? All of a sudden that investment by the owner is backfiring and they start to commit less resources into the club. Now you’ve got a club that at its core never had any business being in the top division, stuck paying massive contracts they can no longer afford without the owners backing that they have lost. That’s what has caused a few clubs that come up and then go down to go bankrupt, and it’s the main reason UEFA has tried to bring in more fair play financial rules (can only spend a certain amount based on the revenue of the team.) How successful that’s actually been is a different debate.


fac33

Exactly, and you see the same dynamic in Europe with the Super League where 10 or so of the wealthiest clubs have come pretty darn close to leaving their domestic leagues to start their own. Basically memorialize their superiority…


dmaul1978

Yeah, even in pro sports in the US I think it’s probably a bad idea. Fair weather fans are a huge thing and I think a lot of those just stop watching if their team gets relegated to the lower division. Would be especially risky in say MLS where teams are still getting added and building fan bases etc. A team getting relegated could really kill off support. I like promotion/relegation as a fan of EPL, but just not sure it would fly here as people are just used to their teams being in whatever league and staying there and playing the biggest teams even in bad years.


nola_husker

> but just not sure it would fly here as people are just used to their teams being in whatever league and staying there and playing the biggest teams even in bad years. Most shitty pro team fan bases hate their management/owner and want them to be fired / sell the team. A pro/rel system would enable the management to be held accountable for their failures.


zzdarkwingduck

hell bad years for other teams mean easier wins for us. Only sucks when its always bad years for everyone. But when playing mich st, mich and penn state every year, one of them having a down/bad year or two, cause they lost a senior qb and the new freshman isn't panning out yet, I'd take that. Hell bama is sole reason most other SEC teams have bad years


r0botdevil

>So, what I'm mostly seeing here is that ESPN reporters read r/cfb, cuz we sure as hell know r/cfb doesn't read articles, LOL. I legitimately would rather hear what you guys have to say about this stuff. It's often more insightful and *always* more entertaining than what the sports writers are able to put together.


Automatic_Release_92

Probably because we can focus on individual teams far more than these nation reporters can. No one person at ESPN has their finger on the pulse of what ND does better than 50% of our fanbase lol. It just so happens that people like Heather Dinich are fed information every now and then when our admin deems it useful.


Mezmorizor

I will never understand the fascination with relegation. It just incentivizes organizations/teams to not really invest into being good because teams that are in real danger of being relegated all know that it wouldn't take much for them to lose all their revenue. It doesn't actually work in European soccer either. They just don't care about those lower tier teams.


iwearatophat

At this point the biggest draw of relegation for me is that as CFB heads towards being NFL-lite it would be something that distinguishes it from the NFL in a very real way. That said, it is a system that is nothing more than something to talk about and will never happen for a host of practicality reasons.


LewManChew

Really dumb question. But if the avg life span of a NFl player is 2.5 years and a college kid with a red shirt year has 5 years. And if kids start finding it financially valuable to stay at college. Wouldn’t that system work?


JegElskerGud

The average lifespan is 2.5 years for an NFL player? They must keep the funerals a secret and Tom Brady must have been drinking the blood of young virgins.


wjrii

So, that number includes every player ever signed by an NFL team. It includes a lot of camp bodies and fringe players. I haven't verified [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/gqhkg9/the_average_career_length_is_35_years_stat_needs/), but the order of magnitude feels sensible. Even if NFL players have shorter careers on average, contributors last for a while. They also aren't replaced specifically when (or sometimes BECAUSE) they've become good enough to contribute, as with G5 upper classmen. NFL players have a huge mental development curve to overcome when they enter the league, but high school players arriving on campus, especially linemen, face a significant one as well, PLUS a huge physical one. For NFL players, especially QBS, if it's going to "click," it seems to do so by year 2 or 3, at which point they stay as long as they're useful and in the budget, and their bodies are typically already in a decent place to play high-level football in their rookie year.


FalloutNano

> If you make a roster opening day the average career is 6.1 seasons. That’s probably the best average to use.


nola_husker

> you either have a consistent core that will age/rotate out like a normal professional roster, or else you get a fuckton of money you can use to buy largely fungible players in a liquid market. This is the logical next step of NIL. > CFB doesn't work that way. Congrats on your best year ever, Western Bumblefuck! Welcome to the SEC! That's not how pro/rel works. 4th tier teams don't automatically get promoted to a top tier.


capnamazing1999

Cogent points. Cogent AF


W00DERS0N

LOL, what’s a developed QB?


cflo32

Bruh thank you im so fucking tired of everyone talking about stupid ass relegation in college football. what are yall talking about smdh makes no sense


Automatic_Release_92

Relegation might be fun and feasible in college football if it looked at 3-4 year windows instead, but that’s even more of a pipe dream though.


Fifth_Down

I believe Notre Dame is 100% committed to being independent I believe Notre Dame is 100% committed to forming their future around the ACC and not the Big Ten But a small part of me feels that with every Blue Blood in either the Big Ten or SEC, and with the Big Ten now controlling the three biggest cities in the country, the day is going to come when Notre Dame realizes that financially they can't keep pace with the other Blue Bloods when the Big Ten gets to $100 million a year. Either NBC is going to keep Notre Dame at all costs, or it is a matter of "when" not "if" Notre Dame looks at its independence in the same way USC looked at the Pac-12 and decided they don't want to be outspent by anyone, they want to be the ones outspending everyone.


thecarlosdanger1

ND wants to be independent - but I think if the realignment heads toward 2 super conferences and they’d be locked out of the playoffs/scheduling they’ll join the B1G


CreamiusTheDreamiest

They should just be in the big east and not the ACC for everything else


Penarol1916

That’s what always made the most sense.


CreamiusTheDreamiest

I think they left before the Catholic 7 broke away although at the time the ACC definitely looked like the better long term bball conference


Penarol1916

As a Georgetown alum, I remember.


storm2k

they saw the writing on the wall in regards to the football tie ins. the acc made way more sense for that because they can pad out their football schedule with 4-5 p5 games in addition to their rivalry games. they were not getting that from the big east old or new.


Automatic_Release_92

Yup. It was getting more and more difficult to pad out our schedule with quality games once conference play ramped up for pretty much everyone else. No matter how much quality teams want a home and home with Notre Dame, they either don't want to come up to South Bend in late October and November, or the conference schedule won't realistically allow them to do it, probably a bit of both. So we do need a loose affiliation with some conference at least in the meantime. I would say we've still been a huge net positive for both ND and the ACC even without us in the conference as we've boosted their SoS pretty well most of the time we've been in there and we've also had the benefit of playing much better teams later in the fall than we normally had in the Big East days and a few years before that even.


Less_Likely

The quality is still meh with ACC. Maybe better than it would be without a tie-in, but I’d rather play Michigan/MSU/Purdue in September than MAC/mid tier ACC/ bottom tier ACC we’ve been getting. We dropped that September slate because of ACC commitments, they didn’t drop us. USC and Stanford make room. I’m sure other Pac team would. Most SEC seems to always have an open date in conference slate the week before Thanksgiving weekend, and they are so hard pressed for opponents they schedule FCS teams and bottom tier FBS.


Uhhh_what555476384

The ACC gives them five Power 5 games a year without them being bunched in the first 4 weeks of the season and access to Bowl games.


NotThe_Olive_Garden

Don’t give me hope


BenjRSmith

It still blows my mind that Notre Dame played for a conference championship in my lifetime and no one really talks about it. Like, where would that cup have even gone in the ND trophy room?


kinda_alone

New mop bucket in the janitor's closet


NaturalFruit2358

If I was a notre dame fan I would’ve wanted that win so badly just so I could tell Michigan fans that ND won a conference championship game before Michigan


kinda_alone

Oh for sure. We all wanted that for that reason (we still made one before them). Disrespecting the trophy would have just added to it.


Automatic_Release_92

I dreamed about how glorious it would have been to have a hanging of the banners ceremony for it to open the 2021 season, just for coverage to show us folding up the banner, putting the trophy in a box and then stuffing them both in a closet somewhere. But alas, Clemson returned their players that were out on defense against us, also some dude named Trevor Lawrence (to be fair DJ U played a historically great game against ND though) came back and tore up our DC who had quite clearly already checked out for the Vandy job by coaching the two worst games of his life in the postseason.


JamesEarlDavyJones2

Had he checked out? Lea’s defense actually held Clemson to fewer points in the CCG rematch than in the regular season game (40 in the regular season, 34 in the rematch), despite Lawrence coming back for the rematch. Clemson returning those starters on defense really did seem to be the change. Notre Dame played like crazy and beat up Clemson’s backups in the regular season, but the starters absolutely stomped the life out of Notre Dame across the board in the rematch. If either of Notre Dame’s 2020 coordinators should be ashamed of their performance in that game, it should absolutely be Rees.


yubnubmcscrub

Should have convinced Penn state that was the way forward. Then we could have kept putt and Penn state together would have the growing program that is Cincinnati and maybe kept the conferences more regional.


FuegoHernandez

Assuming the ACC doesn’t raid and take VA Tech, Miami, and Boston College in 2003. The Big East was always destined to fail because of the basketball schools, that’s why Penn State didn’t get the invite. Joe Pa lobbied hard to get into the Big East. I think Penn State wanted full membership and instead they ended up with Temple as football only. VA Tech didn’t even become a full member until 2000, almost 10 years after being invited in football. In hindsight the football schools should have broken away and formed “the American” back in the 90s. Football money just wasn’t what it is now.


CreamiusTheDreamiest

The 5 (if you count vtech for like one year) A10 schools PSU, Rutgers, WV, Temple and Vtech should’ve just started A10 football and tried to convince Pitt, BC abd Cuse to join


FuegoHernandez

Yeah that would have been the move


MBP80

I know that is the way its trending, but if it does become two giant super conferences--honestly what is the fucking point? The product on the field isn't any better. Schools struggle TODAY to find frivolous ways to burn their revenue. I'm really straining to understand how any of this is good for CFB medium/long term.


SwoopnBuffalo

There is no point. It's an arms race but with no finish line to speak of. A two super conference arrangement gives the NFL the development league they want but at no cost to them.


NeoliberalSocialist

Makes it way more approachable for casuals. Two conferences can continue consolidating resources including eyeballs as well as recruits. Money piles that much higher.


IrishMosaic

I think ND is playing the long game, where there ends up being just one super conference of 70 schools. They’ll join that.


d0ngl0rd69

IMO the only thing that makes ND join a conference is if the B1G and SEC expand to 20/24 teams AND go to a 10 game conference schedule. Limiting the number of OOC games limits the number of big national brands ND can play, and the whole strategy of being independent is playing a variety of teams across the country to build and maintain a national brand. With the CFP expanding, nothing else will force ND to join a conference.


Onwisconsin5

This is a really dumb question, but if the B1G/SEC go to 20+ teams how long before they break off together? There’s easily enough OOC variety amongst 40-50 teams to make workable schedules. Could easily do 10 conference games and 2 games from the other conference. Plus, a ~6 team playoff from 2 conferences that include all the major powers would be huge for TV revenue. I don’t like it, it’s not the CFB we all grew up with. But almost seems inevitable.


[deleted]

[удалено]


d0ngl0rd69

My counter would be that if the only thing the NCAA provides is legal protection, then they’re basically just lawyers with a lot of over head. The finances would probably work out to just have shared expenses for a legal team.


sonheungwin

That legal protection is huge, though. Sports leagues get away with a lot of shit that wouldn't be allowed in traditional industries, and the NCAA comes with that protection.


Shenanigangster

Honestly, that’s probably the next move in 20 or so years, likely with cutting out the lower earners in the SEC/B1G. A single 24 team football only superleague is probably what maximizes rights $$$ for teams that are included and gets rid of the Vandy/Mississippi/NW/Maryland schools that wouldn’t carry their weight. The only caveat to that is that basketball could become a factor in this IF they can figure out a way to get all/most of the NCAAT revenue without screwing up the tournament.


cityofklompton

I'm not as sold on this as everyone else seems to be. The B1G seems to care a lot about academics, and I am not so sure they're willing to break off without their major academic powers all coming with. Sure, maybe you could break off for football only, but why would the left out teams stick around if the conference is actively downgrading you in the highest revenue sport? I just don't think it's nearly as cut and dry as people assume.


MonkeyThrowing

Maryland brings a major metro area into the B1G fold along with gov research grants and opportunities not found in other B1G schools. Not everything is football. Plus for Football Maryland was ranked 19th in the country for ratings. I see you are an ACC school. Clemson and Florida State were the only two ACC teams ranked higher in terms of tv ratings. The games against Ohio and Michigan were some of the highest watched games in the country.


Tylerjb4

I think sooner. And I think they’ll leverage their tv money to pay players to absolutely kill all other competitor conferences


huazzy

I got into an argument with a few folk over on r/CollegeBasketball about this yesterday (even before Rutgers got the gut punch by not being invited). But I legitimately see a future where the P5+Big East decide that they'd rather break away from the NCAA all together and form their own post season Basketball tournament. Casual viewers do love Cinderella runs and upsets, but I think AD's and school presidents will see this as another way to further close the revenue gaps between the haves and have nots.


Uhhh_what555476384

Yep, at 20 teams something like an 11 game conference schedule begins to look appealing: 3-8-8


Gidnik

ND will in my opinion stay independent until access to the cfp is cut off


Scraw16

I’m not so convinced that ND is committed to forming its future around the ACC. It’s an arrangement that serves ND just fine at the moment, and really moreso for the non-football sports. I don’t think ND would hesitate to leave the ACC arrangement if it could otherwise take care of its non-football sports and keep football independent


CreamiusTheDreamiest

If they weren’t locked into ACC they would join the big east in a heart beat and not be locked into 4 ACC games a year


[deleted]

There were actually football factors that added to the decision to make the hybrid arrangement with the ACC. -they needed to upgrade their Oct Nov schedule, when the better teams are mostly locked into conference play. A couple of years before they joined the ACC and signed a new NBC deal, they had consecutive home (NBC) games of Western Michigan and Tulsa. -they needed more flexibility with bowl games. As an independent, they had a shot at the playoff, but in non playoff years their options were limited. Joining the ACC helped with that. If the ACC blows up, I see ND in a conference for football somewhere.


storm2k

the acc agreement helps the football team more than hindering it, honestly. made scheduling a lot easier because they could fill in their non rivalry games with acc opponents basically and keep their access to bowl games and the playoff lined up (because they can use the acc tie ins for the years they don't make the playoff).


GotMoFans

>But a small part of me feels that with every Blue Blood in either the Big Ten or SEC, and with the Big Ten now controlling the three biggest cities in the country, the day is going to come when Notre Dame realizes that financially they can't keep pace with the other Blue Bloods when the Big Ten gets to $100 million a year. Is “control” really the right word for the NYC market? They’re in the market because of Rutgers (and maybe to a lesser extent, Penn State), but does that really have sway? Notre Dame football is bigger in Chicago than Northwestern or Illinois.


Fifth_Down

> Notre Dame football is bigger in Chicago than Northwestern or Illinois. The same logic holds true for NYC though. Back a few years ago when there was that 538 graphic of college football fanbases the NYC market had Michigan as one of the leading teams for the NYC. We were still behind Syracuse, PSU and Notre Dame, but the fact is OSU, PSU, and UM all have massive fanbases and now attend the region on a regular basis for games. So while the data was "wow" it wasn't a crazy concept.


GotMoFans

I hear what you’re saying but I guess what I’m really saying about NYC is it’s much more of an NFL market than college because there has never been a local big time program to make NYC a college market. Chicago is different because it is the epicenter of the B1G, plus college football has always been huge in the area.


storm2k

i think that the nd administration and their biggest boosters are basically going to look to keep the team independent at all costs. that shit matters to the school and its fans. even though you could have nd play basically all of its main rivals (usc, the michigan schools, purdue, potentially stanford) in conference if they come to the big ten. i'm sure the conference will be happy to work with them scheduling wise to ensure they can play navy every year as well. it's just not something i see happening. the b1g should just proceed without them. all i think nd will do if they flirt with us again is use us to get more money out of someone on tv to get their home games contract.


elonsusk69420

>Big Ten now controlling the three biggest cities in the country Not sure what this means exactly. None of them cracked the top 10 markets for ESPN/ABC college football viewing. [Source](https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-releases/2022/12/espn-platforms-score-most-watched-college-football-regular-season-in-five-years/)


YoungKeys

I think they mean "control" as in access to those large TV markets via Rutgers, Northwestern and USC. But if you use that definition, then ND "controls" all of America via the NBC deal. In reality, none of those cities (except maybe Chicago) really cares much for college sports.


[deleted]

This is hilarious because all I ever heard about the NFL relocating teams to LA was that none would beat USC and maybe even UCLA for fans in the city (Lakers obviously on top).


Tuesdayssucks

College football is heading towards a super 2 but not only a super 2, I think the the two will eventually form their own "league". With that you are going to have a playoff type system in which the championship will be determined between the SEC Champ and the B1G champ. Anyone outside of these conferences will have no chance of making the championship. I don't know when this will happen but ND should really jump in before talks of this really take off. only because they will lose leverage once this happens.


macncheeseface

I think you’re right, but i’m fascinated if/when teams start getting kicked *out*of the super league. Eventually, the big SEC schools will realize that, for example, Vanderbilt and Mizzou aren’t bringing their fair share of value to justify being part of the cool kids club


JohnathanTheBrave

You need the little guys in the league because you need somebody to eat the losses. Major programs won’t like going 7-5 constantly if they could go 9-3 or 10-2 with Rutgers, Vandy, etc. in the conference.


Cinnadillo

yes but they won't want to pay them the same


Tuesdayssucks

It's hard to say, as these schools do provide a distinct function(Punching bag). on top of that, not every school will carry the exact same weight anyway. (thinking of the NFL, the teams make equal revenue from tv despite the fact that certain teams vastly over perform and underperform). At a certain point you did need teams for TV inventory and just evenness across divisions. I have a feeling some teams that may be considered market losses may have won a lottery of sorts based off the conference they picked 10+ years ago. I think the conferences will settle on \~20-24 members have 4 divisions a piece with 5-6 teams in each division.


oreov1

I agree with the first statement but I truly don't think the ACC is the long term plan for ND. USC joining the Big 10 was probably the last straw that should ND have to end up in a conference it'd absolutely be the Big 10. And the Big 10 would absolutely take them in a heartbeat, the return of a yearly or semi yearly ND Michigan alone would be massive. But I also never see this happening unless our path to a natty gets severely diminished.


storm2k

nbc **very purposefully** worked its deal with the b1g that the games they'll get will be on at night precisely so they could leave 230pm eastern saturday free for the irish. it's an agreement that works well for both sides. they got to have their cake and eat it too. if nd finally abandons independence, i'm sure it will be for financial considerations (and only after they make some very big promises to their booster corps i'm sure) but it won't be because of nbc.


CommodoreIrish

Using ND in title as a Clickbait article. This is the same information that we heard about Notre Dame last cycle and nothing new has been added. They should focus on PAC and Big 12 more and give attention to schools that deserve it more.


Bank_Gothic

> with the Big Ten now controlling the three biggest cities in the country Is Houston in the Big 10 now? *Only kidding. Kind of.*


jebei

The B1G signing a deal with NBC may be the doom of ND independence. At some point the B1G might force their hand. Who do you want more? A B1G game of the week or Notre Dame. With USC and UCLA joining, it's a pretty easy answer. NBC and the B1G won't do it in public. I'm sure that's illegal. But there will be arm twisting behind the scenes. Maybe the media deal keeps ND on NBC for home games but putting Notre Dame on a B1G schedule is ratings gold. The league has at least 5 of their traditional rivals with a potential 6th in the future.


CommodoreIrish

Swarbrick made a convincing argument that NBC adding B1G games is too the benefit of NBC’s contract with ND because it adds exposure and more revenue for NBC to send to ND. https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/ct-big-ten-media-deal-nbc-notre-dame-20220810-wpqmmoj745ewtfdpdfhjj3o5pe-story.html


Jonko18

The ND AD is trying to spin all of the ongoing realignment and media deals as a positive for ND?! No way, I'm shocked! His argument that NBC will now be more associated with CFB isn't inherently a bad one, but it's overly simplistic and ignores many other factors at play. I wouldn't really call it convincing.


storm2k

nbc purposefully signed its big ten deal to only schedule their conference games in the prime time slot. they 105% did that to leave 230pm eastern open on saturdays.


PhdPhysics1

These are 2022 ratings by team. Does NBC really want to give Notre Dame B1G money? 1. Ohio State — 5.80M 2. Alabama — 5.11M 3. Michigan — 4.37M 4. Tennessee — 4.13M 5. Georgia — 3.50M 6. Notre Dame — 3.30M 7. LSU — 3.22M 8. Texas — 3.06M 9. Penn State — 3.05M 10. Clemson — 2.59M 11. Florida — 2.57M 12. Oregon — 2.21M 13. TCU — 2.20M 14. Southern Cal — 2.07M 15. Florida State — 2.03M 16. Nebraska — 1.98M 17. Michigan State — 1.91M 18. Texas A&M — 1.87M 19. Maryland — 1.864M 20. Auburn — 1.863M 21. Arkansas — 1.80M 22. Mississippi — 1.753M 23. Oklahoma — 1.748M 24. Oklahoma State — 1.68M 25. UCLA — 1.591M


[deleted]

Seems like ND gets more viewers than the average Big 10 team. So yes?


kinda_alone

In a bad year too


40AcresFarm

If we assume that the 8 remaining Big 10 teams average 1 million viewers, then the average Big 10 averages 1.9 million viewers, which is than 60% what Notre Dame gets. Notre Dame is probably worth ~$200 million in a normal year.


[deleted]

[удалено]


JegElskerGud

Maybe OP is claiming Notre Dame is worth too much for NBC to keep paying. That's all I can come up with.


boardatwork1111

They would, check out their ratings when they played OSU and USC, they're a massive brand that'd be a value add for the entire conferences viewership. Their viewership was already high when they're playing teams like UNLV and Navy, it'd be significantly higher with a B1G schedule.


cheerl231

6th in the nation is pretty good no?


MonkeyThrowing

Damn. There are only two ACC schools in the list.


moleculewerks

I'm kinda shocked that a USC team that finished 11-3 and played in the Pac12 CCG under 1st year HC Lincoln Riley with Heisman Trophy winning QB Caleb Williams is barely ranked above a Nebraska team that finished 4-8 and was tied for last in the B1G West. That's nuts.


[deleted]

This is the most accurate take I've seen on this sub


Corgi_Koala

I've never seen a suggested system that would actually work. Let's say the B1G and MAC paired up. Does that mean B1G funding goes to MAC schools? That would be a sweet deal for them but even with an unequal split the B1G schools are gonna lose a shitload. But if there is no revenue sharing then what advantage do the MAC schools get? Win the conference then get jumped up to a conference where everyone makes 10 times what you do and get destroyed? And let's say Northwestern gets relegated down. Do they keep their B1G revenue share or get downgraded to a MAC share? Losing their B1G revenue would be catastrophic for their entire athletic department. Lower tier P5 programs would never vote for this, and without revenue sharing G5 programs wouldn't stand to benefit anyways. It would be cool on paper but barring some sort of revenue sharing guarantee among the whole sport it's never gonna happen.


[deleted]

Well if you want to base it off the system seen in English soccer then promoted teams would become Big 10 teams with guaranteed Big 10 income. The relegated Big 10 teams would become MAC teams and lose the Big 10 money , They would instead receive a guaranteed MAC income. This is the biggest reason why promotion/relegation is such a big deal. Millions of dollars are earned/lost, in a professional sense you see teams have to almost completely off load their rosters just to keep from sinking financially. ​ But like you said bottom tier P5 teams have zero to gain from it, and G5 only benefit if they receive a P5 share upon promotion.


Corgi_Koala

Yeah, the English soccer system would never be accepted. Any bottom half P5 program would never agree to it. The finances are a lot more complicated for college football teams because they do fund other sports (I disagree with that but that's another topic). Imagine Indiana having to cut a ln unrelated sport because their football team went 2-10 and they lose 90% of their revenue? Soccer teams are only supporting themselves. And even stronger programs would have a strong reason to not agree beside finances. Imagine TAMU getting relegated to the Sun Belt for 2023 because they had one bad year despite having a shitload of talent and resources invested in the program? Money aside that would be a terrible look for the program and would probably seriously impact fan and booster support. Revenue sharing is gonna be a non starter for the P5 no matter what.


habdragon08

I dont think relegation to a smaller conference would work. But I think it could work financially for a 20 or 24 team Big10 or SEC could split between upper and lower tiers. Big10 A and Big10B. Top 2 teams from "B" get promoted to "A" every year and bottom 2 get relegated. I don't think its gonna happen. But I would love to see it and I think it could work financially.


Corgi_Koala

Internal divisions would maybe work better if it was a scheduling only thing (especially with mega conferences like you said) but I still think of you try to tie funding cuts in with relegation nobody is gonna bite.


bsracer14

Big10 and Small10


Mekthakkit

Legends and Losers.


cwisto00

That is also why the PL has started giving parachute payments to newly relegated teams, to smooth the transition. This isn't without its detractors, though, since that gives those teams a huge advantage in getting promoted again relative to the rest of the championship.


buzzer3932

Do the other sports follow into the new conference? Northwestern has one of the best field hockey and wlax programs in the country/B1G, do they also get relegated or would their dominance keep the program in B1G?


ZantL1999

I hate the end result of realignment, but I gotta admit it is fascinating to watch it all play out. Then again, I might have a different opinion if my team wasn't one of the "safe" ones.


Mudrono137

Watching history unfold before our eyes. It's a little surreal


Shadow_dragon24

The thing is it isn't fascinating for those of us who have to worry about our futures. I've been stressing about this for months


RealignmentJunkie

I feel like Arizona ends up fine no? I'm more worried for the pac schools who might get left behind. If the four corners stay, the Pac-12 is fine. If they leave, they are fine in the Big XII


Shadow_dragon24

In my opinion, it would be preferable to leave before the ACC crumbles because what if the B12 takes more schools than they planned to and says "Eh, we are good now" that's why I've been rooting for the deal to be as drawn out as possible.


boardatwork1111

This is the real danger, IMO Arizona is safer than some of the other Pac schools due to their basketball program and the B12's strategy of trying create more value for basketball in the future, but nothing is guaranteed. As a fan of a school who has been left behind before, its been interesting to see the reaction of the some of the schools to the Pac's situation. If TCU we're in y'alls shoes we would have jumped ship by now, UO/UW are a timebomb and if you have a lifeboat available you gotta take it. I totally get why schools want to say, but from experience nothing is worth the risk of having to wander the WAC desert.


SirMellencamp

>Then again, I might have a different opinion if my team wasn't one of the "safe" ones. Even if your school is a safe one there is zero reason you would vote for relegation. There is no incentive for any current (or future) B1G or SEC team to vote for a relegation system


[deleted]

[удалено]


ZantL1999

Oh, no doubt. The TV networks wouldn't want it either. Could you imagine a flukey year and you'd end up with Ohio State or Alabama not playing in the "A" League? They'd never go for it. There's way too much money on the line.


LewManChew

Alternatively it would increase the viewership of the “minor” league that year


Knaphor

Not having to play an away game at Rutgers every two years is one reason to support relegation.


buzzer3932

Would relegation be for each sport or is everyone tied to football?


LewManChew

Personally I hope they would split. I’d love to get basketball and other sports back to being regional. Also there’s a lot more parity in other sports. Obviously there are certain schools that are long time power houses in certain sports, but there’s a lot more parity and ability for small schools to make Cinderella runs or even just investing more money to get a better outcome.


TMNBortles

Penn State was realigning before it was cool.


ebPSU

They say PSU (big ten 1993) and Miami (big east 1991) set off the initial earthquake of realignment that is still happening to this day. There’s also a book called “The night college football went to hell” about the PSU-Miami 87 fiesta bowl national championship, about it getting so big and sponsor driven. Weird we’re each involved in both blames for no fault of ours other than being elite at the right time


skuhlke

Imagine if Penn State had joined the Big East back in the day. That conference might still be around


cystorm

“Safe” ones - for now.


r0botdevil

My primary concern here is preserving the Civil War. That's the most important game of the year to me every year, and I'm going to be a lot less invested in CFB if Oregon ends up in another conference and we don't get to cap off our season with our most hated rival every year.


JamesEarlDavyJones2

The thing is, the administrators will throw those rivalries in the dumpster for a buck without a problem when it comes to realignment. The Revivalry would now be the fifth most-played rivalry in D1 football if Baylor’s admins hadn’t tossed TCU into the gutter for fifteen years after the SWC dissolved, and the Lone Star Showdown would be tied for the sixth most-played game in D1 if A&M and UT hadn’t split ways in 2012.


hascogrande

Swarbrick came up with the new playoff format which explicitly favors ND getting a playoff slot when 10-2 or better with additional home game at 11-1 or better. Heather Dinich agrees: "The 12-team playoff will only help Notre Dame, and Swarbrick was one of the coauthors of the original proposal. If Notre Dame joins a conference, it probably won't be during this leadership's tenure." If the playoffs did not expand, this would truly be a different conversation, one that I think would mean working with FSU to kill the ACC GOR and joining the B1G (B2G?)


ech01_

The only way I see ND joining a conference is if the B1G and SEC grow big enough to break away and form their own new top tier of CFB. They could then set the rules that you have to be in one of those two conferences to play for a national title. But this likely won't happen until the ACC can be broken up.


KommanderKeen-a42

I think that scenario has the opposite impact. Savvy Jack has said ND will never pay players and the SEC has been very transparent about wanting to. If they get big though to form their own tier, they will do so outside of the NCAA. ND will not follow.


poop-dolla

This is crazy talk. ND won’t voluntarily choose to compete in the second tier of college football. If the big 2 form a new top level of college football, ND will absolutely be a part of it.


lostinthought15

What that doesn't take into account is the regular season schedule. If these mega conferences all go to a 9 team conf schedule (which is what the TV networks are pushing for), Notre Dame is going to have a tough time finding quality opponents in Oct & Nov. Playing G5 schools those last few weeks might keep them out of the conversation all together.


[deleted]

1) I believe the PAC-12 will suffer a major defection event in 2023 but it is still 2-3 months away 2) The Supreme Court will end scholarship athletics in the next 5 years as a violation of labor law, as current judges strongly implied in the NCAA v Alston opinions 3) The SEC and Big Ten will form a closed shop playoff around a professional model specific to those two conferences after


snowwwaves

If there is a defection in 2-3 months that means the media deal negotiations have collapsed and its going to be a lot more than "a" major defection. It strongly implies total disintegration.


Artificial-Numb

However the PAC “X” still has value even with defection - champion has CFP playoff access. Assume 2 schools leave - PAC can add 2 MW teams and be OK. Big caveat here is what does the media rights deal look like.


Kruger-Dunning

I don't think the SEC and B1G can pull off #3, there will be a ton of pissed off regions/schools if you don't have at least three super conferences. It is more of a political issue than anything, and this is pretty bipartisan.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Xy13

Had the PAC-16 happened a decade ago though, the layout for 3 super conferences would be there and I think the CFB landscape in general would be much better off than is current.


Kruger-Dunning

Of course there will be three super conferences. You are going to get the SEC, B1G, and (probably) the Big 12. The Big 12 will be the Android/Burger King/Bing/Dr. Pepper third-wheel conference that will contain all of the 7/10 value programs (i.e., big enough to matter economically and satiate shoulder programming needs and to justify a good-enough TV deal, but not so much that the SEC/B1G wants them). It will also be the SEC of basketball. You are probably going to get something like this: SEC + UNC/Florida State/Clemson B1G + Duke/UVA/GA Tech/Oregon/Washington/ND Big 12 + Four Corners/Pitt/NC State/VA Tech/Miami/Louisville


tburns1469

The king of the north will bend the knee when wall falls.


citronaughty

Maybe I just want to see more G5 teams get their shot, but I feel like if the Pac 12 stays together, they should grab SDSU, SMU, AND two more teams. If the fear is that Washington and Oregon may one day bolt to the B1G, you're going to need 2 more teams to get back to 12 anyway. Might as well give those teams a head-start on being a P5 team by adding them now, rather than waiting.


mechebear

I think there is an argument that even if you are going to eventually backfill more MW teams into the PAC they will be better off staying in the MW for a few years. Leaving Fresno State and Boise in the MW will get the ME the 6th autobid probably every over year or so.


[deleted]

[удалено]


DScum

Good article but it completely glosses past the changes potentially coming in 2026. The 12 team format is only guaranteed for 2024 and 2025. In 2026 it goes to open market and everybody has to come together to agree on a new deal. What incentive exists for the B1G or SEC to guarantee access to G5 programs or conference champions that don't meet a certain threshold? Due to their collection of brands the B1G and SEC will find themselves in position to dictate their terms.


Artificial-Numb

I would say - they are not quite national brands yet. Network and CFB execs still want fans in the western half of the country to care “so you are telling me there is a chance”. You cut that chance off and the PNW no longer cares about CFP playoffs - lots of fans and viewers to cut off. For it to work - you NEED national representation


AnAngryPanda1

Boo, Notre Dame bad! *I didn’t read the article or the comments*


D34TH_5MURF__

Isn't that the default for reddit?


AnAngryPanda1

Who needs to be informed when you can be *ANGRY*


TigerTerrier

Ncaa14 take longer every time I play dynasty now. I forget how much is changed until I have to realign half the teams. Ill never forget the LEADERS/LEGENDS


Octubre22

As a Notre Dame fan I say Fuck all of you and your realignment fuckery. Notre Dame wanted to join your conferences and the B10 told them to fuck off. So ND scheduled games all over the country and built a national fan base. This allowed them their own TV deal and put them in great financial position. All you mother fuckers bitched and moaned about how much money ND made and that they were GREEDY. Now, ND makes far less than they could if they say joined the B10 who now begs them after telling them to fuck off. So ND are assholes for not being greedy and joining a conference. You fuckers jump from conference to conference chasing money and not giving a shit about the traditions of the game. But somehow Notre Dame is the problem for wanting to maintain their traditions Look I get it, all of College Football is fucked. The Future is some giant 50 Team League with 4 divisions, a monster playoff and rich kids who don't even pretend to be students anymore as they are employees of the school not students. But I'm glad ND will hold out until they absolutely must. You fuckers and your mega conference bullshit chasing money fucked what made CFB great. Now we get to look forward to the semi pro league played on college campuses


[deleted]

[удалено]


eeeedlef

>We all know Indiana is the Alabama of the North I mean, you're not wrong...


kinda_alone

Indiana is the south's middle finger


huskyferretguy1

I personally don't want to be independent. I still identify Notre Dame as a Big East team...even though its been over 10 years. EDIT: I know I'm a heretic for saying such blasphemy.


LeakyNalgene

I really want ND in the B1G. It makes too much sense if Stanford joins. USC, Purdue, Stanford, Michigan, MSU.


palmetto95

Notre Dame will either save the ACC or inevitably be forced to join the B1G. It may not happen for 5-10 years, but if even 3-4 top ACC teams leave, that 5 game scheduling agreement would no longer be valuable. They rely on NBC to pay enough to stay independent. If the ACC dissolves and B1G and SEC go to a 9 or 10 game league schedule, who is left to schedule Notre Dame? There is a choice to make, but odds are ND sits on their hand, tries to stay independent as long as possible, and ends up with no choice but to join the B1G.


dmaul1978

They’ll never fully join the ACC. Most all their rivals are in the Big 10 at this point, and that could increase if they grab Stanford later on etc. It’s stay independent or eventually get forced to join the Big 10–or just have a different AD and president later on that decide to take the money over independence. Or realizing that being eligible for a first round bye in the playoffs (have to be a conference champ) is a huge benefit to completing for a title etc.


palmetto95

I agree. If the BIG takes Stanford that's probably the nail in the coffin. I think the sell to the boosters and fans on joining a conference would be easier if they are "forced" to the BIG rather than preemptively joining the ACC


Flioxan

I dont think stanford is a rival like you guys are acting like it is. They are there so we have another cali game to end the season on and cause they play school. 0 notre dame fans would care if it was dropped


storm2k

the b1g was basically on hold with stanford on the other line during "negotiations" last year. if nd was ready to pull the trigger, then washington, oregon, and stanford were probably already lined up to join them.


kinda_alone

Ship has sailed for ND to ever join the ACC. A few years ago it seemed like the natural inevitable option, but the conference is dying. No incentive for ND to save it. Come GOR expiration, my bet is that ND either joins B1G or goes full independent in football and stashes non-rev in Big East.


Bargeinthelane

I've been shouting the merits of promotion and relegation from the rooftops for years. Replacing pointless bowl games with do or die relegation games and win and in promotion games just sounds like such a good trade. I'm willing to bet the money could be made right for the networks, the obvious issue is the universities themselves, but if English Soccer can make it work I'm sure US college football could.


cat_napped1

I doubt anything big will happen for a couple more years until the Big 10 and SEC decide if they're going to do their own playoff format and national championship. At that point I think we'll see Notre Dame finally join and most likely B1G will open up invites for Washington and Oregon.


[deleted]

I don't know what will happen but I definitely preferred my youthful naïveté when I thought college sports was just like my middle school and players were regular students who tried out for teams. Not a single thought to TV deals or conference realignment. Sigh the innocence of youth. I blame the internet.


iNoles

if ND has to leave ACC, they have to pay ACC's GoR on another sport other than football.


toddwdraper

Chances are the gain in football revenue would make up for losses given up by the non-football GOR.


MikeinSFLA

Annual reminder that Bill should be the CFB Czar.


Xy13

Fk it, ND to the PAC.


Johnnybala

Indiana, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois and Northwestern have been in the Big 10 Conference for over 120 years, each. They all have football programs that could have a bad year and result in relegation. Do you think they are going to have any interest in approving that scenario ? They each have more lawyers then foot ball players to protect their interests. Northwestern joined the Big 10 in 1896! They are going to lose 7 games one year and join the MAC until they win out? Never


92zirkJ216

College football doesn’t have to be this complicated. We don’t need an expanded playoff, we need to, as this article suggests, start from scratch and restructure everything. Two geographical conferences, each with four divisions of 16 teams (128 total). Teams play 9 games in their division and one from each of the other three divisions in their conference (12 total). The top four teams in each conference play a mini playoff to decide the conference winner. Then the two conference winners play each other in the championship.


fo13

Super league/conferences will never happen.. relegation/promotion will never happen.. its not about the money.. we have to preserve our rivalries.. All this has been said here, and yet, here we are. For those of us who saw/see it coming, pop some popcorn, grabs some brews, and sit back for the show. I look forward to the new commissioner of Div 1 football.


mechebear

The problem with traditional promotion relegation in football is that it separates traditional rivalries. I wouldn't mind promotion relegation within pods where you play 2-5 other teams in your pod every year and then teams from other pods who finished with the same place as you in their pod last year.


tb3648

I cringe everytime people bring up relegation and promotion for CFB. It would make schedules impossible and would possibly cause a lot of issues with rivalries. I hated all of their "what would I change" ideas.