mags Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 more on the Big 10/SEC split. Its USA Today so it’s questionable, normally not worth the time, but here it is https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2026/03/10/what-did-sec-big-ten-learn-at-president-trump-roundtable-its-time-to-go/89072802007/ Split seems likely. Doesn’t sound like football either. All sports, completely exclusive, self governed, self contained and maximizing profits. Hopefully the remaining G6 conferences arrange exclusive TV deals, establish their own playoffs and bring in all willing FCS schools. Also a chance to join into friendlier geographical groups. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mags Posted March 17 Author Share Posted March 17 Split seems inevitable. Timing uncertain SEC Commissioner Warns of ‘Messy’ Transition in Store for College Sports https://www.breitbart.com/sports/2026/03/16/sec-commissioner-warns-messy-transition-store-for-college-sports/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthWestCowboy Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 On 3/17/2026 at 12:08 AM, mags said: more on the Big 10/SEC split. Its USA Today so it’s questionable, normally not worth the time, but here it is https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2026/03/10/what-did-sec-big-ten-learn-at-president-trump-roundtable-its-time-to-go/89072802007/ Split seems likely. Doesn’t sound like football either. All sports, completely exclusive, self governed, self contained and maximizing profits. Hopefully the remaining G6 conferences arrange exclusive TV deals, establish their own playoffs and bring in all willing FCS schools. Also a chance to join into friendlier geographical groups. Bringing in all willing FCS schools is probably a hard sell to most current G6 schools and the few P4 schools that might get left behind. As an alumnus of two G6 schools (Wyoming and Oregon State) I am all in favor of bringing in historically successful FCS programs but NOT ALL willing FCS programs. There are currently 69 G6 schools which is plenty. Add in any P4 left behinds and a handful of historically successful FCS programs and you probably end up somewhere around 75-80 schools. As a Wyoming Alum and South Dakota native, I'd like to see the Montana's and Dakota schools move up under this scenario. I question whether these states can fully fund two FBS schools each. Montana State, Montana and SDSU have proven themselves. UND and USD have gotten better but I think they do not make the cut. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mags Posted April 2 Author Share Posted April 2 Good points. SDSU might be able to go but USD won’t. UND would like to move but they have a smaller stadium and overall facilities. Both require bus trips. Im not sure how the decision on FCS schools should be made but an entrance fee would be needed to screen out the weak links. There are enough to round out a second MWC division. Fill that void in the Dakotas, Montana and maybe even Idaho. Lots of potential for the MWC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthWestCowboy Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/2/2026 at 7:54 AM, mags said: Good points. SDSU might be able to go but USD won’t. UND would like to move but they have a smaller stadium and overall facilities. Both require bus trips. Im not sure how the decision on FCS schools should be made but an entrance fee would be needed to screen out the weak links. There are enough to round out a second MWC division. Fill that void in the Dakotas, Montana and maybe even Idaho. Lots of potential for the MWC. If the G6 ever gets to form their own division of college football I'd very much prefer that conferences are capped at no more than 10 teams. Conference championship games are pointless and get in the way of a true playoff. Ten team conferences where everybody plays everybody and the regular season determines the champion. Smaller conferences are also much better for creating rivalries and fan travel to away games. Rivalries put butts in seats. Ticket sales drive revenue. Kind of like how college football used to work before revenue became driven by media contracts and the fan experience went to $hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mags Posted April 3 Author Share Posted April 3 Changes like that would be real good for the fans. Conferences organized like they used to be. I see this as a huge opportunity for the G6. A separate division, marketed as a package with fan friendly conferences. I still see the G6 as college football. The P4 (P2 some say) is not. Colleges do sponsor them but they have little in common with the Gipper and the old college try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthWestCowboy Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/2/2026 at 10:43 PM, mags said: Changes like that would be real good for the fans. Conferences organized like they used to be. I see this as a huge opportunity for the G6. A separate division, marketed as a package with fan friendly conferences. I still see the G6 as college football. The P4 (P2 some say) is not. Colleges do sponsor them but they have little in common with the Gipper and the old college try. I'm in favor of G6 'student' athletes getting paid to play but by the following definitions. 1) Athletic scholarships to high performing athletes that can also make the grade in the classroom. When was the last time you heard of a student being academically ineligible? This used to be commonplace. But now, even at the G6 level the fix is in. Athletic departments and universities will find a way to keep them all eligible whether the athlete can actually pass a class or learns a damn thing or not. The vast majority of college athletes never go to the next level in their sport, so they need to actually receive an education. We need to put the 'student' requirement back into G6 college sports without compromise. 2) I am in favor of every student athlete getting paid federal or state minimum wage for every hour they spend in practice, competition or travel to and from competition. This is totally doable and fair. The whole NIL thing rarely has anything to do with an athletes actual commercial advertising value to a company, cause or product. It's totally a pay for play arms race that is not sustainable at many G4 schools and virtually zero G6 schools. Student athletes deserve more compensation than what they have been given in the past. But this whole NIL and direct university payments thanks to the House vs NCAA Settlement Rule is the opposite extreme creating semi-professional and outright professional athletes. Many if not most of these athletes can cash in at varying degrees during their college years but leave school without professional prospects and no or poor marketable education to move forward with in life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mags Posted April 3 Author Share Posted April 3 You basically described college athletics as it used to be, with a twist: the min wage I could live with that but maybe restricting practice times instead of hourly pay. Only the professionals need to play sports full time. In college it was a sidelight, for fun, for pride for after class. Times have changed, of course. Winning is the name of the game and nobody is going to stop trying to generate the huge revenues of today’s college sports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
