Superconferences and the FBS Divide

Mean Green 93-98 · August 15, 2011

. . . "the handwriting is on the wall" when it comes to college athletics superconferences and the eventual split of those conferences from the rank-and-file of Division I.

http://eye-on-collegefootball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/31327770

FirefightnRick · August 16, 2011

ESPN'S Contracts with all conferences involved is the major conflict here.

Yesterday OKTC reported that ESPN's television contracts provided the biggest obstacle to Texas A&M's addition to the SEC. Today OKTC requested a comment from ESPN on this issue and after this story was published ESPN's Josh Krulewitz issued the following statement to OKTC:"ESPN has longstanding partnerships with both the Big 12 and the SEC and we hope that these partnerships continue."

I'll let you digest that mind-blowing statement for a few moments.

Rick

UNTflyer · August 16, 2011

This is not inevitable. My thoughts are:

Some fans of the Big Six programs cheer this idea. "We will finally stop pretending the non-AQs can compete with those of us who have all the money." But to those fans I ask a simple question… Do you think it would stop there?

Think about the math. Before realignment began last year there were 65 AQ teams plus Notre Dame. As realignment stands today, there will be 67 AQ teams plus independent BYU and Notre Dame. Sixty-nine “BCS” teams. To form four 16-team super conferences, five teams will have to get dumped down to the minor leagues. It won't come in the form of a team being kicked out of a conference. No, rather it will be a game of musical chairs with the last teams without a chair being shown the door. And that has Big 12 and Big East members sweating bullets. They are the weakest of the leagues right now, and that is another reason A&M is putting out the message that they would LOVE to join the SEC. If A&M pulls out and Texas decides to go Pac-12, you have eight Big 12 schools looking for a new home because nobody wants to be part of a diluted conference that will eventually be relegated to the new lower division. Who do you eliminate? Oklahoma State? Texas Tech? Baylor? The resulting fight would certainly involve lawsuits, legislative grandstanding, and maybe even Congressional and Justice Department investigations.

This is the nightmare scenario because it will be a final and unequivocal acknowledgement that college football is not really about the student athlete, or tradition, or rivalry, or amateur sport. No, it will be a heart wrenching though patently obvious confession that the sport has been violated and degraded by the dirtiest of seeds... money and power. And it is guaranteed to ruin the sport. Those who advocate the Great Segregation should think long and hard about the unintended consequences, because they always pop up. Once we admit that money and power are the driving forces behind this plan, there is only one inevitable outcome - elitism.

What happens if 10 years from now the 64 teams decide there are too many elite teams? That the money is being spread too thin? Yes, we should just go to 32 teams, since the bottom half of the league really can't compete anyways. And in 2030, we'll debate going to just 24 teams. You see where this can lead? Is college football on a path to a league where only Ohio State, USC, Texas, Florida, Auburn, LSU, Alabama, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Florida State, Nebraska and Miami compete at the highest level? Those who support the Great Segregation today may find their favorite team cast into the outer darkness just a few years from now.

cwb · August 16, 2011

This is not inevitable. My thoughts are:

Some fans of the Big Six programs cheer this idea. "We will finally stop pretending the non-AQs can compete with those of us who have all the money." But to those fans I ask a simple question… Do you think it would stop there?

Think about the math. Before realignment began last year there were 65 AQ teams plus Notre Dame. As realignment stands today, there will be 67 AQ teams plus independent BYU and Notre Dame. Sixty-nine "BCS" teams. To form four 16-team super conferences, five teams will have to get dumped down to the minor leagues. It won't come in the form of a team being kicked out of a conference. No, rather it will be a game of musical chairs with the last teams without a chair being shown the door. And that has Big 12 and Big East members sweating bullets. They are the weakest of the leagues right now, and that is another reason A&M is putting out the message that they would LOVE to join the SEC. If A&M pulls out and Texas decides to go Pac-12, you have eight Big 12 schools looking for a new home because nobody wants to be part of a diluted conference that will eventually be relegated to the new lower division. Who do you eliminate? Oklahoma State? Texas Tech? Baylor? The resulting fight would certainly involve lawsuits, legislative grandstanding, and maybe even Congressional and Justice Department investigations.

This is the nightmare scenario because it will be a final and unequivocal acknowledgement that college football is not really about the student athlete, or tradition, or rivalry, or amateur sport. No, it will be a heart wrenching though patently obvious confession that the sport has been violated and degraded by the dirtiest of seeds... money and power. And it is guaranteed to ruin the sport. Those who advocate the Great Segregation should think long and hard about the unintended consequences, because they always pop up. Once we admit that money and power are the driving forces behind this plan, there is only one inevitable outcome - elitism.

What happens if 10 years from now the 64 teams decide there are too many elite teams? That the money is being spread too thin? Yes, we should just go to 32 teams, since the bottom half of the league really can't compete anyways. And in 2030, we'll debate going to just 24 teams. You see where this can lead? Is college football on a path to a league where only Ohio State, USC, Texas, Florida, Auburn, LSU, Alabama, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Florida State, Nebraska and Miami compete at the highest level? Those who support the Great Segregation today may find their favorite team cast into the outer darkness just a few years from now.

Flyer, I have total respect for you, but this is why several months ago I was arguing with you about a playoff system. It would lead to this. As non-aq, this is exactly what we don't yet want.

UNTflyer · August 16, 2011

I hate hearing these sportswriters talk like it is a done deal, nothing can be done.

I have a feeling if they try this, it will not stand up to government scrutiny. There are a lot of politicans and lawyers who went to Marshall and Houston and Central Florida and Tulsa and UAB and so on and so forth.

FirefightnRick · August 16, 2011

Like the article I linked to above points out. The fans and alumni and AD's or commissioners don't stand in the way of this deal going down with their feeiings and hearts in mind. It's ESPN's contractual obligations with all conferences involved that stands in the way.

And in knowing this, one has to ask. If ESPN knew they were so tied into said contracts that relied on conference balances why did they rock the Big 12 boat by agreeing to give ONE of those teams(texas) a contractual advantage over everyone else?

Rick

NT80 · August 16, 2011

If ESPN knew they were so tied into said contracts that relied on conference balances why did they rock the Big 12 boat by agreeing to give ONE of those teams(texas) a contractual advantage over everyone else?

Rick

Yes, I doubt A&M even considers going to the SEC if Texas isn't given $300 mil and their own Network from ESPN.

As for the SuperConferences, it will simply be the reincarnation of 1-A and 1-AA all over again.

untjim1995 · August 16, 2011

I hate hearing these sportswriters talk like it is a done deal, nothing can be done.

I have a feeling if they try this, it will not stand up to government scrutiny. There are a lot of politicans and lawyers who went to Marshall and Houston and Central Florida and Tulsa and UAB and so on and so forth.

Yeah, there are lots of politicians from those schools--its just too bad that they are out numbered GREATLY by politicians from West Virginia, Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, and Alabama, all of whom control their respective state capitols and Washington, DC. Look at our own state. Texas and A&M have shared PUF funds for over a century without sharing a dime with any other school, including the other big public schools in the state. Texas Tech, UH, and UNT, not to mention all of the other state schools have some political ties in Austin--just not enough to get any of that PUF money. I can assure that all our SBC brethren can relate. Arkansas doesn't even act as if Arky State exists, LSU treats the other LA schools like they are little kids, and I'm sure Kentucky and Tennessee aren't just giving WKU and MUTS a whole lot of love. Power and Money may be the downfall of college athletics, but make no mistake, both will continue to be the major forms of influence for a long time to come.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · August 16, 2011

This is all the reason I preach getting off the mouse wheel these guys have set up for schools like ours.

Just quit scheduling them.

Yes, I know the argument back, by heart, "We need the money because our budget blows." Okay, fine. But, even in the movie My Bodyguard the skinny Jewish kid finally realized he didn't need Ricky Linderman to fight his battles for him. And, he did that by breaking Matt Dillon's nose by himself.

At some point, the non-BCS AQs have to stand up for themselves and start colluding on the same level as the BCS AQs.

"But, TFLF...no one will care." Okay, so f'ing pout about it.

Look, you either take your program seriously or you do not. If you don't take it seriously - i.e., you simply make it a road show for beatings - you deserve to be disrespected.

The non-BCS AQs should get their own regional networks up and going, online, hulus, whatever. Start scheduling only each other and broadcasting those games within those networks and let the BCS AQs eat themselves.

If not, you'll stay simply stay on the mouse wheel the BCS AQs have set up for you to run on forever. I say, get the hell off the mouse wheel and go have a chew on your own empty toilet paper tube.

Edited August 16, 2011 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

TIgreen01 · August 16, 2011

Like the article I linked to above points out. The fans and alumni and AD's or commissioners don't stand in the way of this deal going down with their feeiings and hearts in mind. It's ESPN's contractual obligations with all conferences involved that stands in the way.

And in knowing this, one has to ask. If ESPN knew they were so tied into said contracts that relied on conference balances why did they rock the Big 12 boat by agreeing to give ONE of those teams(texas) a contractual advantage over everyone else?

Rick

Good question, indeed. Anybody else got the feeling that Texas A&M is being played like a fiddle?

Something else is going on here. I have no F'ing idea what, but Texas and OU are being awfully quiet. For two schools that would immediately be fighting a completely different battle to recruit kids in this state, they are too quiet.

Green Oracle · August 16, 2011

Like the article I linked to above points out. The fans and alumni and AD's or commissioners don't stand in the way of this deal going down with their feeiings and hearts in mind. It's ESPN's contractual obligations with all conferences involved that stands in the way.

And in knowing this, one has to ask. If ESPN knew they were so tied into said contracts that relied on conference balances why did they rock the Big 12 boat by agreeing to give ONE of those teams(texas) a contractual advantage over everyone else?

Rick

My guess is because it wasn't in their contract.

untjim1995 · August 16, 2011

This is all the reason I preach getting off the mouse wheel these guys have set up for schools like ours.

Just quit scheduling them.

Yes, I know the argument back, by heart, "We need the money because our budget blows." Okay, fine. But, even in the movie My Bodyguard the skinny Jewish kid finally realized he didn't need Ricky Linderman to fight his battles for him. And, he did that by breaking Matt Dillon's nose by himself.

At some point, the non-BCS AQs have to stand up for themselves and start colluding on the same level as the BCS AQs.

"But, TFLF...no one will care." Okay, so f'ing pout about it.

Look, you either take your program seriously or you do not. If you don't take it seriously - i.e., you simply make it a road show for beatings - you deserve to be disrespected.

The non-BCS AQs should get their own regional networks up and going, online, hulus, whatever. Start scheduling only each other and broadcasting those games within those networks and let the BCS AQs eat themselves.

If not, you'll stay simply stay on the mouse wheel the BCS AQs have set up for you to run on forever. I say, get the hell off the mouse wheel and go have a chew on your own empty toilet paper tube.

I tend to agree with this, as I have said that the non-AQs should really look at creating their own playoff system to create excitement during the AQs "bowl" season. Those AQs are so beholden to the bowls that they aren't going to leave them for a while. Imagine a Boise State versus UCF semifinal playoff game in mid-December when 6-6 Texas Tech is playing 7-5 Arizona in the Insight Bowl. It seems like it would create way more interest than the spare bowl game, especially if the next day has another semifinal between undefeated North Texas playing SMU to go the championship game. If North Texas play Boise State for the non-AQ championship in the last week of the year, I can't imagine that an Alamo Bowl game between 7-5 Oklahoma State and 6-6 Northwestern will really attract many viewers.

Let the AQs have their BCS bowl games. We will keep the dollars from the playoff system and avoid the cost of going to bowls that still cost the university a lot of money in the end. For a playoff game, it would seem that every non-AQ should be able to sell out a home game, especially if FCS schools can do it. All monies from the enitre playoff run gets split evenly amongst the non-AQs. If we are going to go the route of superconferences anyway, then we might as well put the screws to those schools first. Don't play them in non-conference and create a playoff that they aparently cannot do, since the AQ presidents and bowl committees have all the power and won't change anything. Or, of course, we could just keep the status quo, too...

LongJim · August 16, 2011

Good question, indeed. Anybody else got the feeling that Texas A&M is being played like a fiddle?

Something else is going on here. I have no F'ing idea what, but Texas and OU are being awfully quiet. For two schools that would immediately be fighting a completely different battle to recruit kids in this state, they are too quiet.

This is what I've been able to glean from various places:

1. aTm's athletic department needs money. They need to fill Kyle on a regular basis. SEC membership will do that for them. This has little to do with the LHN. aTm well knows that Fox already pays Florida in the neighborhood of $100 million for their multimedia rights, in addition to their TV share from the SEC. Yes, about $10M extra per year. But of course, no one mentions that because it's not convenient cover to get out of the Big 12. Equal revenue sharing in the SEC is a joke. Let's not pretend otherwise.

2. SEC wants an inroad into Texas. They know that Texas is never going to the SEC, and they know OU will go where Texas goes. They do not want to cede all of the Texas market to the PACX. An invite to aTm (the only school that truly has its pants down for the SEC) is their hedge.

3. Texas has said many times that they want to keep the Big 12 together. OU has communicated to them that they will go where Texas goes. The Big 12 gives them the easiest path to the MNC, and keeps the SEC and their recruiting "strategies" out of the backyard. Barring Big 12 survival, a PACX west pod of Texas/OU/OSU/Tech (or possibly Kansas) allows all of the teams to continue to play a majority of games in Texas, the same as before.

4. If aTm bolts, and the Big 12 crumbles (Missouri leaves as well) Texas/OU/OSU and Tech/Kansas will bolt for the PACX. Baylor/IState/KSU (probably)/and either Kansas or TT will say hello to another conference. OU and Texas are waiting to see how the aTm/Big 12 divorce happens, and what further collateral damage ensues.

Edited August 16, 2011 by LongJim

The Fake Lonnie Finch · August 16, 2011

I tend to agree with this, as I have said that the non-AQs should really look at creating their own playoff system to create excitement during the AQs "bowl" season. Those AQs are so beholden to the bowls that they aren't going to leave them for a while. Imagine a Boise State versus UCF semifinal playoff game in mid-December when 6-6 Texas Tech is playing 7-5 Arizona in the Insight Bowl. It seems like it would create way more interest than the spare bowl game, especially if the next day has another semifinal between undefeated North Texas playing SMU to go the championship game. If North Texas play Boise State for the non-AQ championship in the last week of the year, I can't imagine that an Alamo Bowl game between 7-5 Oklahoma State and 6-6 Northwestern will really attract many viewers.

Let the AQs have their BCS bowl games. We will keep the dollars from the playoff system and avoid the cost of going to bowls that still cost the university a lot of money in the end. For a playoff game, it would seem that every non-AQ should be able to sell out a home game, especially if FCS schools can do it. All monies from the enitre playoff run gets split evenly amongst the non-AQs. If we are going to go the route of superconferences anyway, then we might as well put the screws to those schools first. Don't play them in non-conference and create a playoff that they aparently cannot do, since the AQ presidents and bowl committees have all the power and won't change anything. Or, of course, we could just keep the status quo, too...

I love you.

Green Oracle · August 16, 2011

I love you.

This scenario you've described is a reality - an example is Appalachian St. playing someone else for the semifinals or quarterfinals to the old Div II tournaments - did anyone pay any attention to them?

TIgreen01 · August 16, 2011

This scenario you've described is a reality - an example is Appalachian St. playing someone else for the semifinals or quarterfinals to the old Div II tournaments - did anyone pay any attention to them?

You beat me to it....

Check out the 2010-11 FCS Playoff schedule vs. the 2010-11 FBS Bowl schedule. The 2 only matched up on 2 dates (Dec 18---when only lowly non-AQs were playing bowl games---and Jan 7--in a head to head with a Cotton Bowl featuring an LSU-Tamu matchup).

I'm guessing the FCS championship game was handily whipped in the Jan 7 matchup. As for the earlier, the FCS kicks off their playoff in November, then avoids going head to head with the bowl tv schedule as much as possible.

Seriously, look at the schedules. You're already getting this proposal---almost all of the non-AQs play their bowl games before Dec 27, then it's almost entirely AQ matchups from that point on. So you're really proposing nothing new. Making it a "playoff" may add some sex appeal, but not much.

FCS Playoff 2010-11 Schedule

FBS Bowl 2010-11 Schedule

Edited August 16, 2011 by TIgreen01