Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Darrell.....JS on IT saying no realignment?


Recommended Posts

Very naive on JS's part. Yes, realignment WILL happen..... eventually. I think the statement that it may happen sooner than most expect is the only surprise here. However, there is a lot of smoke. As Mr Duke said, after the SCOTUS presents their ruling and a few other legal matters make it through the courts we may find that something big had already been worked out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darrell...Jesus stated (perhaps you already know) in Humidor that realignment is not happening according to his sources......your thoughts? Many thanks!

 

Jesus is running a little behind.  Darrell reported this last week, I believe.

 

More and more, this site is gaining credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is he saying no to BYU in the B12 or no to realignment happening in the next five years?

 

I certainly don't believe realignment is going to happen until something shifts the landscape, but with the Aereo, Univ of Maryland, O'Bannon and other matters awaiting resolution, the economic landscape of college football is unquestionably about to change. When change comes, those affected will react.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cost of playing big time college football is skyrocketing. Only a handful of programs make any kind of profit and that's eaten up by the overall athletic department which is operating in the red. The only people happy (i.e. making money) with the current paradigm are the networks and the bowl administrators. For too long, the content providers, the universities themselves, have been leaving a huge amount of money on

the table. The NCAA and the member schools have shown the capability to organize and monetize a major playoff scenario, March Madness. It's the NCAA's prime source of income. It brings in approximately
$1Billion/yr. in TV rights, sponsorships, ticket sales, concessions, etc. But there are 351 member schools in Div. 1 to take a cut of that.

College football is a different animal. There's only a few dozen schools with the caliber program to win a national championship. No one doubts a true college football playoff would be won, 90% of the time, by one of the blue bloods that have already won one or more MNCs. But as I said, the cost is exorbitant and going up. More and more smaller programs are choosing not to try and keep up with the arms race.

The Power 5 commissioners, who take their marching orders from the school presidents, have all laid out, in the last 6-8 months, what it's going to take to be a player in the new paradigm.

 

The point of the above background information, is that the time has come for major CFB to take control of it's content and reorganize to fully monetize their product. This, of course, has been quietly building momentum behind the scenes for years. Make no mistake, Texas and Deloss Dodds have been one of the driving forces behind this move. If you're thinking "realignment" then you're still thinking inside the box.

What's needed is a complete reorganization from the ground up. All schools need to be willing to sacrifice a little in order to gain a lot.

Tradition is a huge part of the allure of CFB. Some will complain about the commercialization of good ol' State U. But there also needs to be a concerted effort to retain, and in some cases, recapture the traditions of the past. Old, established rivalries are one of the biggest component of this concern. Almost, invariably, these are regional rivalries. The new borders and scheduling priorities need to reflect this.

The only way this can be accomplished is if all the major players are willing to share and share alike. The most obvious analogy is the NFL. Money is pooled and shared equally. Divisions and conferences are drawn to reflect regional similarities and traditions but also, fairness and cost effectiveness.

There should be one central body that not only ensure an even playing field for all but is in charge of scheduling and officiating. There should be a centralized training and evaluation organization to enable the best possible officials and pay them accordingly. They should be paid by the central organization and rotated through the different divisions so there can be no charge of favoritism.

Ideally, IMO, there would be 72 teams involved. There would be 8 conferences of 9 teams each. Every school plays 8 conference games and 4 OOC. The 4 OOC games would, of course, be among the 7 other conference members. These 4 games would rotate so that there would always be good interconference games every week and each school could be reasonably assured of good cross-regional exposure.

A huge problem is recruiting. There has to be a central body with real enforcement teeth to thoroughly vet all aspect of recruiting nationwide. This is where some teams (and some entire regions) are going to have to sacrifice a little so everyone can gain a lot. I'm not even sure if it's possible to break the Omerta like, code of silence, that exists in some parts of the country, but a good start would be to grant the enforcement division subpoena power.

All of this would have seemed like a fantasy, pie-in-the-sky, hallucination just a few years ago. But real world challenges, not the least of which are legal challenges, have made this scenario a real possibility.

The real question is, do the school presidents have the stones to grasp the bronze ring.

Stay tune, it should be an interesting ride.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cost of playing big time college football is skyrocketing. Only a handful of programs make any kind of profit and that's eaten up by the overall athletic department which is operating in the red. The only people happy (i.e. making money) with the current paradigm are the networks and the bowl administrators. For too long, the content providers, the universities themselves, have been leaving a huge amount of money on

the table. The NCAA and the member schools have shown the capability to organize and monetize a major playoff scenario, March Madness. It's the NCAA's prime source of income. It brings in approximately

$1Billion/yr. in TV rights, sponsorships, ticket sales, concessions, etc. But there are 351 member schools in Div. 1 to take a cut of that.

College football is a different animal. There's only a few dozen schools with the caliber program to win a national championship. No one doubts a true college football playoff would be won, 90% of the time, by one of the blue bloods that have already won one or more MNCs. But as I said, the cost is exorbitant and going up. More and more smaller programs are choosing not to try and keep up with the arms race.

The Power 5 commissioners, who take their marching orders from the school presidents, have all laid out, in the last 6-8 months, what it's going to take to be a player in the new paradigm.

 

The point of the above background information, is that the time has come for major CFB to take control of it's content and reorganize to fully monetize their product. This, of course, has been quietly building momentum behind the scenes for years. Make no mistake, Texas and Deloss Dodds have been one of the driving forces behind this move. If you're thinking "realignment" then you're still thinking inside the box.

What's needed is a complete reorganization from the ground up. All schools need to be willing to sacrifice a little in order to gain a lot.

Tradition is a huge part of the allure of CFB. Some will complain about the commercialization of good ol' State U. But there also needs to be a concerted effort to retain, and in some cases, recapture the traditions of the past. Old, established rivalries are one of the biggest component of this concern. Almost, invariably, these are regional rivalries. The new borders and scheduling priorities need to reflect this.

The only way this can be accomplished is if all the major players are willing to share and share alike. The most obvious analogy is the NFL. Money is pooled and shared equally. Divisions and conferences are drawn to reflect regional similarities and traditions but also, fairness and cost effectiveness.

There should be one central body that not only ensure an even playing field for all but is in charge of scheduling and officiating. There should be a centralized training and evaluation organization to enable the best possible officials and pay them accordingly. They should be paid by the central organization and rotated through the different divisions so there can be no charge of favoritism.

Ideally, IMO, there would be 72 teams involved. There would be 8 conferences of 9 teams each. Every school plays 8 conference games and 4 OOC. The 4 OOC games would, of course, be among the 7 other conference members. These 4 games would rotate so that there would always be good interconference games every week and each school could be reasonably assured of good cross-regional exposure.

A huge problem is recruiting. There has to be a central body with real enforcement teeth to thoroughly vet all aspect of recruiting nationwide. This is where some teams (and some entire regions) are going to have to sacrifice a little so everyone can gain a lot. I'm not even sure if it's possible to break the Omerta like, code of silence, that exists in some parts of the country, but a good start would be to grant the enforcement division subpoena power.

All of this would have seemed like a fantasy, pie-in-the-sky, hallucination just a few years ago. But real world challenges, not the least of which are legal challenges, have made this scenario a real possibility.

The real question is, do the school presidents have the stones to grasp the bronze ring.

Stay tune, it should be an interesting ride.

Although I agree with some of what your saying here.... but I disagree with the "socialism" part with money. To be fare to you I may have misunderstood you....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I agree with some of what your saying here.... but I disagree with the "socialism" part with money. To be fare to you I may have misunderstood you....

 

I'm guessing you think the NFL is "socialist" also,

I'm not suggesting we share gate revenue or concessions. What's caused the instability in realignment the last 4 years is the money grab for TV rights. The schools own the product but they're selling it too cheap to the networks. They're selling and ESPN is buying. And why, because they're sacred and ESPN is rich. They need a collective bargaining agreement. I suppose you think that's too much like unions to be a good idea.

The other shared revenue should be the bowl money. The schools have lost control of their product to a corrupt bowl system. To regain control of that situation, the schools need to band together and lay down the law to whoever wants to remain in the bowl business.

The point is, if the schools don't speak with one voice, the money men will pick them off one by one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with a collective approach is that not all the schools have the same interests. Texas and Notre Dame have vastly more valuable media rights than Iowa or Mississippi State. Rutgers has a media rights value in a bundled distribution world that evaporates if bundling of channels is discontinued. BYU wants a distribution channel not only for its media rights, but one they can also distribute religious programming on. Schools like UTSA and UCF want to have the opportunity to build programs while schools like Miami, Colorado and (in the not too distant future) Baylor want to lock in the accomplishments of their program so they don't suffer financially from backsliding. Schools like Utah, Tech, Mississippi St. want association with larger programs and equal sharing for the financial benefits. 

 

A 72 team arrangement immediately shuts out 50 schools who currently compete in the FBS division. That also would mean every team makes it to a bowl game each year. That is just the beginning of the problems in trying to force a structure with an arbitrary number of schools. Why is 72 the magic number? Why not 35 or 127? What about the FCS schools, such as Sam Houston or North Dakota State that compete at a high level in their division but need the FBS game each year to finance their program. 

 

A relegation system of a set number of major programs (say 64 for the sake of discussion) with a second Tier that allows for the schools with a two year average and sends down the bottom 5 while sending up the top 5 would make sense, but with scheduling done years out, having relegation decisions affecting next year's schedule complicates things. 

 

The answer is not easy and it is not going to come soon. The fact that each of the litigation matters passing through the courts will affect the economic landscape appreciably also complicates matters. There simply is no better system at the moment, so until one presents itself, it makes no sense to realign individual conferences or the overall structure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with a collective approach is that not all the schools have the same interests. Texas and Notre Dame have vastly more valuable media rights than Iowa or Mississippi State. Rutgers has a media rights value in a bundled distribution world that evaporates if bundling of channels is discontinued. BYU wants a distribution channel not only for its media rights, but one they can also distribute religious programming on. Schools like UTSA and UCF want to have the opportunity to build programs while schools like Miami, Colorado and (in the not too distant future) Baylor want to lock in the accomplishments of their program so they don't suffer financially from backsliding. Schools like Utah, Tech, Mississippi St. want association with larger programs and equal sharing for the financial benefits. 

 

A 72 team arrangement immediately shuts out 50 schools who currently compete in the FBS division. That also would mean every team makes it to a bowl game each year. That is just the beginning of the problems in trying to force a structure with an arbitrary number of schools. Why is 72 the magic number? Why not 35 or 127? What about the FCS schools, such as Sam Houston or North Dakota State that compete at a high level in their division but need the FBS game each year to finance their program. 

 

A relegation system of a set number of major programs (say 64 for the sake of discussion) with a second Tier that allows for the schools with a two year average and sends down the bottom 5 while sending up the top 5 would make sense, but with scheduling done years out, having relegation decisions affecting next year's schedule complicates things. 

 

The answer is not easy and it is not going to come soon. The fact that each of the litigation matters passing through the courts will affect the economic landscape appreciably also complicates matters. There simply is no better system at the moment, so until one presents itself, it makes no sense to realign individual conferences or the overall structure. 

 

Obviously, you can't flesh out all the details in a single msg. board post.

Realignment of conferences is real, even though it makes no sense, IMO. Aggy has been losing money over their move. Most schools that made the leap did so on faith, or out of desperation/fear of being left behind. So far, it hasn't really worked out for most of them.

A reorganization would create, more or less, permanent stability and give the schools greater control over their product.

Currently, there are 65, including ND, in the P5. I think that's to low (not to mention an odd number). You have to include BYU for 66. The ideal division would follow time zones. The Midwest and the Rocky Mountain areas don't have enough teams and the ones they have are spread out. You need to add teams like Cinncy, Tulsa, Tulane, etc,

to flesh out the midwest. And maybe Colo. State, Air Force, Utah St., a New Mexico team, to flesh out the Rockies.

Of course, the membership needs to be regulated along guidelines like: stadium size, avg. attendance, participation in a minimum number of sports (men's and women's), etc.

Some schools won't be able to keep up and will have to step down. Other schools could up grade to take their place.

If the P5 conferences get together and disband their current conference structure and basically become a SUPER CONFERENCE of 65, they can force the networks to

renegotiate the TV deals. Divide this new entity into regional divisions, invite a few new members and reboot college football.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, you can't flesh out all the details in a single msg. board post.

Realignment of conferences is real, even though it makes no sense, IMO. Aggy has been losing money over their move. Most schools that made the leap did so on faith, or out of desperation/fear of being left behind. So far, it hasn't really worked out for most of them.

A reorganization would create, more or less, permanent stability and give the schools greater control over their product.

Currently, there are 65, including ND, in the P5. I think that's to low (not to mention an odd number). You have to include BYU for 66. The ideal division would follow time zones. The Midwest and the Rocky Mountain areas don't have enough teams and the ones they have are spread out. You need to add teams like Cinncy, Tulsa, Tulane, etc,

to flesh out the midwest. And maybe Colo. State, Air Force, Utah St., a New Mexico team, to flesh out the Rockies.

Of course, the membership needs to be regulated along guidelines like: stadium size, avg. attendance, participation in a minimum number of sports (men's and women's), etc.

Some schools won't be able to keep up and will have to step down. Other schools could up grade to take their place.

If the P5 conferences get together and disband their current conference structure and basically become a SUPER CONFERENCE of 65, they can force the networks to

renegotiate the TV deals. Divide this new entity into regional divisions, invite a few new members and reboot college football.

 

When 65 people meet to decide how to control the marketplace for college sports between the members of the group and intentionally bar other competitors from the marketplace, anti-trust attorneys salivate. Don't forget that the only reason the NFL, MLB and NBA can control their sports the way they do is because they have been granted an anti-trust exemption by the federal government.

 

There was a time when TCU, SMU, Rice, Army and Harvard dominated college football. When TCU and Univ of Chicago were touting Heisman winners and National Championships, Texas hadn't ever been ranked number one in the polls at any time during any season. Excluding programs from participation not only creates enormous problems with respect to federal anti-trust law, it also promotes stagnation in the sport. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, the membership needs to be regulated along guidelines like: stadium size, avg. attendance, participation in a minimum number of sports (men's and women's), etc.

Some schools won't be able to keep up and will have to step down. Other schools could up grade to take their place.

 

 

The parameters you've outlined above are what I had in mind in establishing a "Division 4" for football.

 

It'll be really interesting to see how all of this wrangling shakes out over the next few years.  Personally, I'd hate to see a new division break away from the NCAA if it adversely affects the great Basketball and Baseball tournaments.  I love the underdog stories those produce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to think of him as a blowhard that doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.  JMO.

OOhh, burn! lol

 

Srlsy, I know your solution is to fire Powers and hire an sec sycophant to run the University and move us to the Holy Land of CFB. Maybe that works in the short term, maybe not. But what's your long term vision for college football? Should we just keep shuffling the deck chairs?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When 65 people meet to decide how to control the marketplace for college sports between the members of the group and intentionally bar other competitors from the marketplace, anti-trust attorneys salivate. Don't forget that the only reason the NFL, MLB and NBA can control their sports the way they do is because they have been granted an anti-trust exemption by the federal government.

 

There was a time when TCU, SMU, Rice, Army and Harvard dominated college football. When TCU and Univ of Chicago were touting Heisman winners and National Championships, Texas hadn't ever been ranked number one in the polls at any time during any season. Excluding programs from participation not only creates enormous problems with respect to federal anti-trust law, it also promotes stagnation in the sport. 

 

Duke - what solves all of this is a total playoff system and not just 4 teams.

 

Consider this.  What if every conferences champion were admitted to a playoff system?  And I mean EVERY conference.  What are there - 26 NCAA conferences?  I think to accomodate the extra games, every school would have to give up their pre-conference games, but I could live with that.

 

Who could complain then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

🏈 Texas vs. Baylor

  • Days
  • Hours
  • Minutes
  • Seconds

McLane Stadium
Waco, TX
Kickoff Time TBA - TV TBA

  • 2021 Texas Football Schedule

    Week
    Opponent
    W/L
    9/4
    Louisiana
    W 38-18
    9/11
    @Arkansas
    L 21-40
    9/18
    Rice
    W 58-0
    9/25
    Texas Tech
    W 70-35
    10/2
    @TCU
    W 32-27
    10/9
    Oklahoma
    L 48-55
    10/16
    Oklahoma State
    L 24-32
    10/30
    @Baylor
    11/6
    @Iowa State
    11/13
    Kansas
    11/20
    @West Virginia
    11/27
    Kansas State

Our Affiliation

USATDP_Logo.png

Quick Links

×
×
  • Create New...