Realignment of FBS

untjim1995 · November 21, 2012

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8654194/college-football-conference-expansion-likely-end-maryland-big-ten

I think this is ultimately what will happen here. The NCAA and the big college networks that control college athletics want 60 or so teams in the FBS. As Saban mentions, those teams play each other within their FBS and the playoff system that they will implement will allow them free range to play better OOC schedules.

UNT Mean Green · November 21, 2012

So do we end up with multiple "divisions" like the Top 60-70, and the next 60 or so? If that's the case, obvously C-USA would be in the second tier, would you guys like to see a separate postseason for the second tier? separate polls? What would be the incentive/draw for a recruit to go to the second tier?

untjim1995 · November 21, 2012

I'd bet that the second tier (CUSA,MWC,BE,SBC,MAC) and a few FCS schools will make up a new level of college football. You'd probably have another 60-70 teams in that level. What would be interesting to look at then is if a team like SMU would finally say, yeah, it makes sense to be aligned with North Texas (see UTEP and NMSU or La Tech and ULM) or would they just say, you know, its not worth it anymore, we aren't keeping a football team anymore.

As for UNT, would you continue to support and attend games if we are in a second level of college football again? If we got aligned in that second division with the other Texas, LA, OK, and NM schools that don't get elevated to that new level of FBS, would it increase your interest because we finaly would get to play SMU, UH, Baylor, etc...as potential conference mates?

One thing is for sure...its gonna be an interesting next three to five years to see how this plays out.

Green Dozer · November 21, 2012

I think to the hard core fan, though everybody would prefer the top tier, a playoff at the second tier would ok. However, I think as for as getting new fans interested, it would be perceived by them that we are irrevelant in college football and make it even more difficult to grow the program because we are in tier 2. Also, if we don't start consistently winning soon anyway, it won't make any difference ,, the avg fan won't be around.

Green Dozer · November 21, 2012

I'd bet that the second tier (CUSA,MWC,BE,SBC,MAC) and a few FCS schools will make up a new level of college football. You'd probably have another 60-70 teams in that level. What would be interesting to look at then is if a team like SMU would finally say, yeah, it makes sense to be aligned with North Texas (see UTEP and NMSU or La Tech and ULM) or would they just say, you know, its not worth it anymore, we aren't keeping a football team anymore.

As for UNT, would you continue to support and attend games if we are in a second level of college football again? If we got aligned in that second division with the other Texas, LA, OK, and NM schools that don't get elevated to that new level of FBS, would it increase your interest because we finaly would get to play SMU, UH, Baylor, etc...as potential conference mates?

One thing is for sure...its gonna be an interesting next three to five years to see how this plays out.

SMU will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to tier 2. Houston is a toss up. As for Baylor, they would be in the top tier.

GrayEagle · November 21, 2012

BS

If Nick Saban were a coach at one of the lesser members of the FBS do you think that he would still advocate superconferences? This is all about the rich getting richer and the poor getting the hell out.

You set a criteria for the Division 1A folks and then follow it. At one time to be a member you had to have a stadium of 30,000 and 17,000 average attendance. They didn't enforce it. Not only did they not enforce that they weakened the requirements. You could have a stadium of less that 30,000 if half of your conference met the requirements. Then they weakened the attendance factor to 15,000 once every two years. They haven't enforced those either.

If they had sixty big schools then the winners would castigate the losers for not being competitive enough or having enough attendance and want a larger share. Greed has no place in college sports.

My personal preference would be to have eight conferences with 12-16 teams in each conference. Set the requirements for the 96th most qualified based on some combination of stadium size, market size, attendance, revenue, and years of service in the highest division and enforce it. If any university falls below the minimum requirements for three consecutive years then they drop to the next level. At least everyone would know where they stand.

I know, file this under 'it makes too much sense to ever happen' category but something needs to be done to curtail the greed.

Edited November 21, 2012 by GrayEagle

hickoryhouse · November 21, 2012

Was listening to Norm today, he was talking about the impending demise of the Big East leading to a possible combination of CUSA and the Remnant of the Big East. Don't know what that would mean for teir 1 / Tier 2, but That would be an interesting development.

GrandGreen · November 21, 2012

Any program relegated to tier 2 would be a second class program and it would be the about the end of football at NT and many other schools. Any one around during NT 1aa days, should know that being a bad fb schools is superior to a great fc school. NT and many other schools are not channeling what resources they have to be designed division 2 or whatever they may call it.

However, I would expect a heck of a legal fight if the ""bigs" try this. I also doubt Sabin has a lot of support for his ideas from other programs, I think most coaches enjoy playing lesser teams with huge advantages and usually at home. The problem with segmenting the top programs, is that half of them will become losers and then what happens in the next reorganization. You end up with the NFL but without the controls that some what encourage competition.

Edited November 22, 2012 by GrandGreen

akriesman · November 21, 2012

Any program relegated to tier 2 would be a second class program and it would be the about the end of football at NT and many other schools. Any one around during NT 1aa days, should know that being a bad fb schools is superior to a great fc school. NT and many other schools are not channeling what resources they have to be designed division 2 or whatever they may call it.

However, I would expect a heck of a legal fight if the ""bigs" try this. I also doubt Sabin has a lot of support for his ideas from other progams, I think most coaches enjoy playing lesser teams with huge advantages and usually at home. The problem with sementing the top programs, is that half of them will become losers and then what happens in the next reorganization. You end up with the NFL but without the controls that some what encourage competition.

While I would never want us to take a step back again, I have to admit to really enjoying the FCS playoff system more than the bowls (even though NT was winless in the 1AA playoffs at the time). At least they crown a real champion and not a paper one.

I hate what has happened to college football (greed). And, the outlook is not getting any better.

GreenFlag · November 21, 2012

I don't think it will happen because of the college athletics industrial complex.

These people chose this profession as a career path and they won't support s system that would cut their employment opportunities in half.

Look at some "Tier 2" head coaches. Dennis Franchione, Bowden, McCarney, Schellenberger, Solich, etc. etc.

Athletic Directors are retreads too. Ditto to college president's.

These jobs don't last forever and they would be limiting their opportunities for future employment if they did this.

Saban believes his own hype - he was a bust for the Miami Dolphins when the talent level isn't so glaringly different.

oldguystudent · November 21, 2012

Everybody is a proponent of the invisible hand of the free market until it comes to college football.

emmitt01 · November 21, 2012

Two things:

1)The "big boys" will NEVER break away and agree to play only amongst themselves. UT will never agree to change their OOC slate from ULL, Texas State and Rice to Vandy, Arizona and Miami. Too much risk of taking one or two losses before conference play. The "tune up" game will never be willingly given up. The unfortunate thing for the "have nots" is that they'll never have to. Even if they broke away completely and formed a permanent division between "us" and "them", schools like NT would still whore themselves out to fill their stadium with the opposing team's fans (and the boot licking t-shirt alumni). The truly sad thing is that, if the "have nots" showed solidarity and refused to play them anymore, within 5-10 years we'd start filling our stadiums with OUR fans because of the competitive balance AND the "big boys" would cave to any/all demands to get away from having to play eachother.

2)I don't buy the arguments that players would stop coming here or fans would stop coming. Montana seems to do ok. App State too. Anyone wanna play Sam Houston? I don't. If you can't sell players on the chance to be the next Jerry Rice, Walter Payton, Joe Flacco, Tony Romo or Steve McNair then you're failing. And we already pick up the other Texas schools' table scraps...what would be so different?

shaft · November 21, 2012

D1 won't split because:

1. Politics. Too many state legislatures and congressmen would have to be involved and agree to let the NCAA to split.

2. Money. The money doesn't get better for the PAC-12 if there is not an SBC.

3. Semi-pro scheduling. The mid-tier and bottom tier power conferences schools wouldn't want to give up their scheduling options. Without an NFL like revenue sharing devices schools won't want to give up scheduling extra home games.

UNTflyer · November 22, 2012

They won't cut FBS in half, because half the bowl games would disappear, Then fat cat Bowl Board members won't be able to take free cruises and collect six-figure salaries for doing nothing.

GrandGreen · November 22, 2012

Actually under the current system, the bigs have nearly all of everything anyway. Why should they change. They will channel all the "majors" into four conferences (SEC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10) and run everything anyway. They get probably 80% of the revenue now, why change and risk having to play other teams that actually have a good chance to beat you.

I wish someone or thing would actually advocate changes that would encourage competition and the health of all teams. Put a limit of coaches salaries, facilities, and limit the number of home games possible. Do away with one way coaches contracts, you sign; you complete the contract. Slow down at least a little on the foolish athletic arms race which really only benefits AD staff and primarily coaches. Anti - American and against free enterprise, not really. The pros already do some of this in the name of competition and they are for profit organizations College athletics are non-profits and are on perilous ground IMO paying HC millions of dollars while the players are considered amateurs. 

Christopher Walker · November 22, 2012

Everybody is a proponent of the invisible hand of the free market until it comes to college football.

This.

GrandGreen · November 22, 2012

This.

Not sure the free market has much to do with non-profits. Second, the free market in anything is more a concept than a reality.

greenminer · November 22, 2012

It's 4am. Too late to elaborate why, but I believe contrary to what has been expressed here: that the football powers would gladly dispose of the bottom feeders of FBS, whether it means a division split or an extrememe conference makeover (comlete with new bowl contracts).

greenminer · November 22, 2012

The continual conference realigment issues are a reflection of a bigger race: the race to not be left out of the media/money wealth.

Proud North Texan · November 22, 2012

It's not going to happen

trussbussdad · November 22, 2012

Think I said this the other day...but, I see the NCAA wanting 4 super conferences with multiple divisions. Then have regional conferences to comprise the MAC, CUSA, MWC, etc. Develop a 8 team bowl / playoff based upon those who win those conferences. Leftover bowls go for 2nd and 3rd place teams in conference. Want to determine a true nat'l championship...here is the way... On the field with equal shot given to mid majors...NO POLLS!!!

UNTflyer · November 22, 2012

Everybody is a proponent of the invisible hand of the free market until it comes to college football.

I propose sports leagues being operated as capitalist ventures will destroy themselves. Capitalism seeks to eliminate or diminish the competition, which is good for an individual firm. Sports leagues cannot exist without competitors, and in fact do better when competitors are on a more equal footing.

Edited November 22, 2012 by UNTflyer

gksmith · November 22, 2012

With the Big 10(12) adding two more teams next year (14) to follow the SEC 14 teams and looking for more, this could very much be the direction the BCS is going. The Big 6 conferences that make up the BCS can very much make this happen in the next few years.

Than there is the "have nots" aka everyone else in D 1 FBS who will be shut out of the playoff system.

Might as well make the Big 6 conferences their own division (BCS division) and everyone else in D 1 FBS a division with its own playoff system. And look for the Big 6 to become the Big 4.

The Big 6 are:

SEC

ACC

Big East (though on shifting ground)

Big 10 (wasn't there a rumor they were going to change the name to The Big Conference?)

Big 12 (though they only have 9 or 10 teams)

Pac 12

shaft · November 23, 2012

The Big 6 are:
SEC
ACC
Big East (though on shifting ground)
Big 10 (wasn't there a rumor they were going to change the name to The Big Conference?)
Big 12 (though they only have 9 or 10 teams)
Pac 12

Pssst. The Powers That Be have already kicked the Big East out.

For the next 12 years the systems works likes this.

Playoff Level: Teams ranked 1-4

Big Bowl + Accesse Bowls: Rose (PAC 12 + Big Ten, Sugar (SEC + Big 12), Orange (ACC), Fiestia, Cotton, Georgia

Which means any given year there will be 3 at large slots in access bowls with one of those 3 slots going to the highest ranking team from the Group of Five (Big East, MWC, CUSA, MAC, SBC)

Bowl Level: Approximately 28 bowls that all have contractual obligations to the various conferences.

Edited November 23, 2012 by shaft