Are We Headed Towards 4 Conferences?

Donate To GopherHole
MplsGopher said:
If those rumors come to fruition and the Bay schools join the ACC, that will be disappointing. But nothing is surprising anymore. Can you even call yourself a prostitute if you give yourself away for free??

Still doesn’t matter: the PAC will survive. Exit fees for MWC and AAC don’t matter. One of those confs, respectively concocted in 1998 and 2013, should be the one to bite the dust if we’re going to lose a conf. Not the 108 year history of the PAC. Nope

Wazzou, OSU, San Diego St, Fresno St, Hawaii/Gonzaga, Colo State, New Mexico, UNLV, Boise, Rice, Tulane, SMU if not also ACC.

Plenty good enough
Click to expand...

Do you ever tire of being made the fool with your terrible takes?
 


- FSU was always just posturing and saber rattling in order to try to get as much of an unequal revenue share for themselves as they could muster. The ACC GoR is airtight and no set of lawyers, no matter how much they're paid, can defeat it. So this expansion is one way to get them their blood money.

- If it goes through, one of the wrinkles that I'm sure Notre Dame and the ACC are fighting over is if the annual Notre Dame Stanford football game will count as one of ND required five ACC games per year, or not (which defacto makes it a sixth game, since the ACC will own the broadcast rights when the game is played in Stanford).

- I'm in 100% agreement with the coaches that are speaking up that these harebrained, cockamamie coast-to-coast formations of schools will be detrimental to sports other than football and indeed there isn't nearly as much point for there to be those games in those other sports. Non-football should go back to leagues of 8-10 regional schools.

- I don't think the SEC feels pressure to expand to 18, to match the (awkward) movement of the Big Ten. They can't get at any of the ACC schools that would be, mostly, the only natural expansion targets. The best they could do otherwise would be: Kansas (to get KU-MU rivalry back), maybe West Virginia (border state with Kentucky), maybe Oklahoma State (Bedlam rivalry with OU).
 


If you think about people spending money to put stuff up on their big screen in the living room, and the options they have like Netflix, HBO Max, Hulu, etc. for $20/mo ... or YouTubeTV for $70/mo ... why on Earth would do they do the latter??

Live sports.

That (and the news for me) is about the only thing of value keeping people paying for certain plans. Everyone is scrambling to get major live sports.

It will be interesting to see when it finally comes out what the first price point is going to be for people to stream a package of ESPN channels without having to go through a bundle provider of any kind.

Would you pay $50/mo just for ESPN, 2, U, 3, + ? Vs what you get with YTTV for $70/mo? Maybe not.

But $30/mo? Maybe now you're talking. We will see, sooner than later ...
 


MplsGopher said:
- FSU was always just posturing and saber rattling in order to try to get as much of an unequal revenue share for themselves as they could muster. The ACC GoR is airtight and no set of lawyers, no matter how much they're paid, can defeat it. So this expansion is one way to get them their blood money.

- If it goes through, one of the wrinkles that I'm sure Notre Dame and the ACC are fighting over is if the annual Notre Dame Stanford football game will count as one of ND required five ACC games per year, or not (which defacto makes it a sixth game, since the ACC will own the broadcast rights when the game is played in Stanford).

- I'm in 100% agreement with the coaches that are speaking up that these harebrained, cockamamie coast-to-coast formations of schools will be detrimental to sports other than football and indeed there isn't nearly as much point for there to be those games in those other sports. Non-football should go back to leagues of 8-10 regional schools.

- I don't think the SEC feels pressure to expand to 18, to match the (awkward) movement of the Big Ten. They can't get at any of the ACC schools that would be, mostly, the only natural expansion targets. The best they could do otherwise would be: Kansas (to get KU-MU rivalry back), maybe West Virginia (border state with Kentucky), maybe Oklahoma State (Bedlam rivalry with OU).
Click to expand...
One of the reasons cited for a shift among the holdouts who are not Clemson and FSU is the ability of ESPN to reopen the ACC media package if the number of schools drops below 15 (if Clemson and FSU leave). Bringing on additional schools now would insulate the ACC from the risk.
 

MplsGopher said:
If you think about people spending money to put stuff up on their big screen in the living room, and the options they have like Netflix, HBO Max, Hulu, etc. for $20/mo ... or YouTubeTV for $70/mo ... why on Earth would do they do the latter??

Live sports.

That (and the news for me) is about the only thing of value keeping people paying for certain plans. Everyone is scrambling to get major live sports.

It will be interesting to see when it finally comes out what the first price point is going to be for people to stream a package of ESPN channels without having to go through a bundle provider of any kind.

Would you pay $50/mo just for ESPN, 2, U, 3, + ? Vs what you get with YTTV for $70/mo? Maybe not.

But $30/mo? Maybe now you're talking. We will see, sooner than later ...
Click to expand...
Most streaming services are bleeding money. At least YTTV sort of aggregates some of those viewing options.
 

Update - reported ACC meeting on Monday was postponed after the shooting at North Carolina.

some media outlets, including Jim Williams, are reporting that the meeting "could" resume today.
when and if they do meet, there seems to be a lot of belief that the expansion will be approved, adding Cal, Stanford and SMU.

IF that happens, then Washington State and Oregon State are left with seemingly two options - the Mountain West or the American.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Update - reported ACC meeting on Monday was postponed after the shooting at North Carolina.

some media outlets, including Jim Williams, are reporting that the meeting "could" resume today.
when and if they do meet, there seems to be a lot of belief that the expansion will be approved, adding Cal, Stanford and SMU.

IF that happens, then Washington State and Oregon State are left with seemingly two options - the Mountain West or the American.
Click to expand...
SI also had an article saying if it doesn't happen by tomorrow, they will be talking with the Big 12.
 



I won’t count on it, but I hope Wazzou and ORSt figure out some way to force it to be the PAC. Even if in name only.

108 years of history vs 1998?? Piss off. PAC stays. Middle finger to Wyoming’s prez. Go play in a Uranium ore pile.

Their one point of leverage are the March Madness payments owed to the PAC. Some significant $$$. Maybe offer a piece of that to any MWC and AAC schools willing to defect to the good guys.
 

I don't think those schools have that kind of clout.

UW and Oregon could do that...but their little brothers have zero cache.
 

so, the College Football Playoff committee is meeting this week.

Supposed to talk about the format for the 12-team playoff starting next year.

only as of today, nobody knows how many conferences will still be in existence and how many teams will be in each conference.

but here's the kicker:

George Kliavkoff will be attending the meeting.

WHY? to represent the 4 - or maybe 2 - teams left in the PAC?

oh to be a fly on the wall and hear what the other commissioners are saying........
 

I would think the simplest is:
- six highest ranked (final CFP) conf champions get bids
- six highest ranked (final CFP) remaining teams get at-large bids (could be a conf champ that didn’t make it above, but very unlikely)

And possibly:
- any of the top six ranked conf champions that are not ranked overall in the top __ have their spot converted into another at-large bid. (__ could be 12, 15, 20, 25)
 



MplsGopher said:
- FSU was always just posturing and saber rattling in order to try to get as much of an unequal revenue share for themselves as they could muster. The ACC GoR is airtight and no set of lawyers, no matter how much they're paid, can defeat it. So this expansion is one way to get them their blood money.

- If it goes through, one of the wrinkles that I'm sure Notre Dame and the ACC are fighting over is if the annual Notre Dame Stanford football game will count as one of ND required five ACC games per year, or not (which defacto makes it a sixth game, since the ACC will own the broadcast rights when the game is played in Stanford).

- I'm in 100% agreement with the coaches that are speaking up that these harebrained, cockamamie coast-to-coast formations of schools will be detrimental to sports other than football and indeed there isn't nearly as much point for there to be those games in those other sports. Non-football should go back to leagues of 8-10 regional schools.

- I don't think the SEC feels pressure to expand to 18, to match the (awkward) movement of the Big Ten. They can't get at any of the ACC schools that would be, mostly, the only natural expansion targets. The best they could do otherwise would be: Kansas (to get KU-MU rivalry back), maybe West Virginia (border state with Kentucky), maybe Oklahoma State (Bedlam rivalry with OU).
Click to expand...
I think it's likely that Cal & Stanford would only travel for football and stay local for other sports. They could be an ACC football only member like Notre Dame is for hockey in the Big Ten. Non-revenue sports will continue to de-emphasized. U of M men's soccer is just a club team, etc. I bet more and more non-rev sports just stay local in the future to reduce costs. The same probably happens to the four new PAC schools in the Big Ten.
 

MplsGopher said:
I won’t count on it, but I hope Wazzou and ORSt figure out some way to force it to be the PAC. Even if in name only.

108 years of history vs 1998?? Piss off. PAC stays. Middle finger to Wyoming’s prez. Go play in a Uranium ore pile.

Their one point of leverage are the March Madness payments owed to the PAC. Some significant $$$. Maybe offer a piece of that to any MWC and AAC schools willing to defect to the good guys.
Click to expand...
PAC owes like $50m to Comcast for overpayment.
 

SeaBee_Gopher said:
I think it's likely that Cal & Stanford would only travel for football and stay local for other sports. They could be an ACC football only member like Notre Dame is for hockey in the Big Ten. Non-revenue sports will continue to de-emphasized. U of M men's soccer is just a club team, etc. I bet more and more non-rev sports just stay local in the future to reduce costs. The same probably happens to the four new PAC schools in the Big Ten.
Click to expand...
Stanford has said they don't want their non-revenue sports going down in competition as they want to continue producing Olympians.
 

MplsGopher said:
I would think the simplest is:
- six highest ranked (final CFP) conf champions get bids
- six highest ranked (final CFP) remaining teams get at-large bids (could be a conf champ that didn’t make it above, but very unlikely)

And possibly:
- any of the top six ranked conf champions that are not ranked overall in the top __ have their spot converted into another at-large bid. (__ could be 12, 15, 20, 25)
Click to expand...
I believe B1G and SEC are pushing for 5 conference champions and 7 at large.
 

Compromise to that is like I said.

Instead of 7 guaranteed at-large, if the 6th conf champion is ranked lower than ___ (insert reasonable number that all agree on) THEN that converts to the 7th at-large.
 


SeaBee_Gopher said:
I think it's likely that Cal & Stanford would only travel for football and stay local for other sports. They could be an ACC football only member like Notre Dame is for hockey in the Big Ten. Non-revenue sports will continue to de-emphasized. U of M men's soccer is just a club team, etc. I bet more and more non-rev sports just stay local in the future to reduce costs. The same probably happens to the four new PAC schools in the Big Ten.
Click to expand...

Why would the ACC want to do that? Also, I am not sure how that is really all that helpful to Cal and Stanford anyways.
 

mngolf said:
I believe B1G and SEC are pushing for 5 conference champions and 7 at large.
Click to expand...
It should be all FBS conference champions, and the remainder at large.
Pretty sure that at every other level, the conference champ gets an auto bid.
 

disco said:
It should be all FBS conference champions, and the remainder at large.
Click to expand...

Everyone knows that the G5 champs are going to get beatdown pretty handily in the first round. In the first year people are going to get all excited watching Tulane or Coastal Carolina or whatever win their conference and get an invite. Then when it's 49-0 at the half of each of the games, people will get tired quickly and viewership will drop accordingly. Then the networks will insist upon higher quality games and hopefully only B1G and SEC teams go to the playoff.

disco said:
Pretty sure that at every other level, the conference champ gets an auto bid.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure at every other level there isn't such a HUGE talent gap between the teams that make the playoff.
 

GopherTheJugular said:
Everyone knows that the G5 champs are going to get beatdown pretty handily in the first round. In the first year people are going to get all excited watching Tulane or Coastal Carolina or whatever win their conference and get an invite. Then when it's 49-0 at the half of each of the games, people will get tired quickly and viewership will drop accordingly. Then the networks will insist upon higher quality games and hopefully only B1G and SEC teams go to the playoff.


Pretty sure at every other level there isn't such a HUGE talent gap between the teams that make the playoff.
Click to expand...
I'd say that the gap between the MIAC/WIAC and the UMAC probably fits the bill here, and the UMAC gets an auto bid.
 

GopherTheJugular said:
Everyone knows that the G5 champs are going to get beatdown pretty handily in the first round. In the first year people are going to get all excited watching Tulane or Coastal Carolina or whatever win their conference and get an invite. Then when it's 49-0 at the half of each of the games, people will get tired quickly and viewership will drop accordingly. Then the networks will insist upon higher quality games and hopefully only B1G and SEC teams go to the playoff.
Click to expand...
I get your point, but using Tulane isn't a really good example seeing as how they beat USC earlier this year in the Cotton Bowl in a quite entertaining game.
 

The G5 should be able produce two champs that will make competitive first round games. Remember that those will be seeds 5-12. Not Alabama vs Georgia Southern.

Sounds like ACC meeting is still on for Monday, just perhaps not in person? No point in holding a vote if it isn’t going to pass.

And sounds like PAC is going to rebuild (correct decision!)
 

Then the networks will insist upon higher quality games and hopefully only B1G and SEC teams go to the playoff.
Click to expand...
And I say this every year. Then there needs to be another official split at the D1 football level, because if they can't play for a chance at a championship, why are the Coastals and Louisiana Techs of the world playing?
 

disco said:
I'd say that the gap between the MIAC/WIAC and the UMAC probably fits the bill here, and the UMAC gets an auto bid.
Click to expand...
I'll defer and admit that you know more about those conferences than I do, which is nothing.

That being said, and I'm asking this genuinely, not as a smart alec, but do any UMAC teams ever do anything, or are they just cannon fodder? Maybe they just get an invite in order to get to 16 teams?

Another thing to consider is almost no one watches those games, so it doesn't really matter who you invite. For the CFP though, networks are counting on having games that people want to watch, which pretty much means no G5 and hopefully no Big 12.
 

Ope3 said:
I get your point, but using Tulane isn't a really good example seeing as how they beat USC earlier this year in the Cotton Bowl in a quite entertaining game.
Click to expand...
Yeah, unfortunately a bad time to use them in my analogy. I'd still contend though that Michigan, tOSU, and Georgia would have obliterated Tulane. TCU probably plays them straight up and goes to overtime.
 

MplsGopher said:
- FSU was always just posturing and saber rattling in order to try to get as much of an unequal revenue share for themselves as they could muster. The ACC GoR is airtight and no set of lawyers, no matter how much they're paid, can defeat it. So this expansion is one way to get them their blood money.
Click to expand...
From everything I've read and heard is that the amount of money at stake is the settlement the ACC would agree to when FSU/Clemson/etc leave the conference. That is another way to say, yes lawyers negotiating the buyout can defeat it.
 

disco said:
And I say this every year. Then there needs to be another official split at the D1 football level, because if they can't play for a chance at a championship, why are the Coastals and Louisiana Techs of the world playing?
Click to expand...
For the love of the game? To take in some football revenue in order to fund the rest of their athletic department? To beat their rival each year?

Those seem like good enough reasons to me.

But I'd also be fine with a split if those schools feel the need to try to win a championship.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom