Has the Leadership of FBS & Media Learned Anything from the decline of Boxing?

[Mike Jackson]

For the most part, I grew up in the 1980s and early 90s.   And although I was young, I remember some boxing fans warning that  boxing was on a steep decline due to inaccessibility.  Close circuit TV, PPV, and premium cable channels started taking over the sport.  Only crap matchups between tomato cans and unknown rising prospects became the only matches accessible to casual fans.  Also during this time the number of boxing organizations issuing world titles doubled from 2 to 4 purely to chase "lower risk" paydays for boxing promoters and their stars.  

I remember being so excited when I found out Leonard vs Hagler were going to fight.  I remember a joke prediction from my older friends from more affluent family to this day: Hagker is going to win because the punches are going slide off his slick bald head but they are going to stick the Leonards Afro. But I didn't get to see any highlights of the fight until months after the fight and now it has been so long I haven't even thought of watching the whole fight on the internet. All that is to say I remember TALK about boxing more than actually getting to see the best matchups live.  Because match that had buzz ended up on PPV live and even the replays were exclusive to premium cable (HBO & Showtime).   So by the time I was a young adult, I had gotten used to missing all the big fight so I never really made an effort to find out how to watch them.  Now boxing is a niche sport, far behind the big 4, with so little coverage that I almost missed the Crawford vs Spence fight because it was rarely mentioned in the main stream.  I doubt I would have caught if Crawford wasn't a DFW legend mention on our local news. 

How does this parallel with the current state of FBS football?  

1. No Central Authority 

2. No interest in the welfare of quality journeymen boxers (good G5 and mediocre P5 that rarely challenge conference/division titles) that test prospects, build their legends and help them become stars.

3. With splintering streaming, networks, conferences (world boxing organizations, promoting organization), and etc.  Where to watch games on TV and who your team will play regularly or can "earn" a matchup with great play is clear as mud (especially if you have ONE loss and not P5 or in the case of boxing have the wrong belt or promoter)

This is ALL bad.  And it confuses me that it seem that very few in power see the parallels.  This isn't just bad for the G5 in the short term.  Every program but the biggest and most valuable in the country will start to feel the squeeze soon like Stanford, Oregon State, and Washington State.

The expanded playoff restructured for Super Conferences will be another sweet money poison pill for regular season football.  For instance, why prioritize watching top ranked Alabama vs top ranked Tennessee if it is likely they will have to rematch in an actual elimination playoff game later if they both keep winning after the regular season match up?  Sure you probably watch as a rabid fan of either team or the SEC in general.  But that  regular season conference matchup now means very little to people outside SEC country when playoff and/or conference championships rematches between high ranked conference teams become frequent.

aren'tdouche bag UCLA coach Chip Kelly is throwing out the idea that all FBS should be independent.  It like we are on a fleet of Titanics who have all recieved "proceed with caution due to icebergs in the area".    But none of the captains in the fleet are considering slowing down, stopping, or changing course.  It is infuriating to see this avoidable car wreck in slow motion.

IMO only the top 10-15 most watched and successful programs are really safe enough to believe they are unassailable.  Now I can imagine that 8 more years of competitive irrelevance at Nebraska could even have them being undervalued in the next big round of media rights neogiation.  I haven't watched more than a quarter of a Nebraska game since their first year in the Big 10.  My questions to the group are:

>Why haven't they learned anything?   

>*Once the damage becomes undeniable can it be somewhat mitigated?  

*I vacillated between using 'will' or 'can' for the last question.  The lack of 'will' to take $1 less for less for the good of the whole of the sport is virtually nonexistent at the richest programs.  

Edited August 12, 2023 by Mike Jackson
Misspelling

[Salsa_Verde]

Get rid of all the conferences, then align the FBS into one league with divisions that a regional or something like the NFL, two conferences that pick a champion to eventually play for the natty. I believe this is the only way to solve the travel issues and restore traditional regional rivalries 

[UNTLifer]

@Mike Jackson, any relation to PlumMeanGreen?

[Mike Jackson]

On 8/12/2023 at 3:35 PM, Salsa_Verde said:

Get rid of all the conferences, then align the FBS into one league with divisions that a regional or something like the NFL, two conferences that pick a champion to eventually play for the natty. I believe this is the only way to solve the travel issues and restore traditional regional rivalries 

Yes, I love that idea but it I don’t think it would ever happen.  But if it did I would like Six team divisions and 12 member conferences standardize.  No 3 or more time zone conferences.  Hawaii would just be treated like it is in the Pacific time zone game conference schedule.  That leaves everyone 5 out of conference games tochase dollars and/or ranking in non-conference scheduling.   Separate football from other sports.  All non-conference regular game revenue is split 75% between 2 individual teams with 25% going in to the FBS revenue pot.  Games with FCS schools, FCS teams guaranteed 40% of ALL stadium game day revenue.  And they are guaranteed  65% TV & radio broadcast revenue.  Alabama, you going to slum it  and beat down Chattanooga you aren't taking the  home FBS game revenue.  

The majority of fans have always wanted to see more cross regional games between the biggest brands.  They have always had the freedom to do so out of conference.  And the blue bloods in these super conferences will still get to avoid each other in regular seasons. For instance.   At BEST Texas will play Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, or Alabama once every 3 years in the regular season.  And they with likely only play LSU every other year.  That is stupid considering that is a bordering state with a rabid football fanbase.  All this conference realignment changes only have to do with overall sorriness FBS.  Always trying to get maximum money for the least bit of on the field competitive risk.  At least in boxing we are talking about boxers who have a short shelf life and they have lifetime records they are judged by.  In constrast each year teams start fresh 0-0.   A Michigan loss to Appalachian State may eliminate them from BCS championship bowl consideration one season.  But the next year's Michigan team isn't judged by it.

[UNTLifer]

Brevity, please. Tired head his ever encroaching.