Jump to content
Did I hear a WOOSH?

Conference Realignment thread

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, HawaiiMongoose said:

I wonder what kind of response they’ll be able to muster.  Frowning?  Harsh language?

Official Pac-12 response:

mad bambi GIF

  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

BSU & BYU each receive tier 3 media rights, in addition to a' la carte' inventory sale to ESPN. 

All former impositions upon traditional BSU football are disposed of - cowbells included...

The academies each do the round-robin for America. 

The Mountain West may become the premiere Western Conference. 

Why not??

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2021 at 2:21 PM, Someone Else said:

My take is that it will ultimately come down to broadcast revenue and how a school handles (helped or hurt by NIL).  Not about the 35k fans that want to watch football at the new stadium.  My opinion is for football to survive long term SDSU will either need to be in a better conference or the MWC will need to become a much stronger conference. (either is possible) 

No disrespect to any school but the SEC is going to take control of this and I am just not sure how important 'minor league' football will be to broadcasting companies.  

Again, I am just speculating like everyone else but I don't think college sports are going to handle NIL very well unless you are a big boy school.  I actually hope I am wrong.

It isn't like the SEC hasn't been in control before this move, it's not like they haven't been making tons more money that G5 schools. We are already third tier and that isn't really going to change. You have the P5 elites, the rest of the P5 schools, and then the G-5 schools (which has higher and lower value schools). Will the G5 eventually get locked out of the college playoffs? Sure. They are eventually going to be closer to 32 BCS schools than 48 or 64. The elites are looking to challenge the NFL.  But, there will still be a market for college football in San Diego and other G5 cities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Den60 said:

It isn't like the SEC hasn't been in control before this move, it's not like they haven't been making tons more money that G5 schools. We are already third tier and that isn't really going to change. You have the P4 elites, the rest of the P5 schools, and then the G-5 schools (which has higher and lower value schools). Will the G5 eventually get locked out of the college playoffs? Sure. They are eventually going to be closer to 32 BCS schools than 48 or 64. The elites are looking to challenge the NFL.  But, there will still be a market for college football in San Diego and other G5 cities.

Yeah the elites are going to lose viewership because they can’t compete with the NFL.  
 

And I think you meant the P4 elites.   Most of the remaining 8 are such small states/Markets even the MWC wouldn’t consider them.  Realize most are in smaller DMA’s then Fresno.   Or they are in slightly larger DMA’s than Fresno with more competition.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, HawaiiMongoose said:

I wonder what kind of response they’ll be able to muster.  Frowning?  Harsh language?

They may try to limit the number of at-large teams any league can have in the play-offs.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NorCalCoug said:
Live look at SEC meeting 😂 

reaction of everyone not included in the top of the SEC and seeing where college athletics is headed

tenor.gif

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Aztec1984 said:

The Chargers demanded the city spend $100M to upgrade the Q. The city did and got stuck with a stupid ticket guarantee that bled public money. As soon as the renovation was completed, Alex Spanos went on MNF and demanded a new stadium. The Chargers worked on a plan to be gifted the land (perhaps a 99 year lease), build a new stadium adjacent to the Q, then tear the stadium down and redevelop the entire site to fund it. They could not get a financial partner and the Chargers pulled the deal off the table. The Chargers had terrible ownership over the years, Gene Klein sold to Alex and both were bad. Dean is even worse. Hell, he is a laughing stock, the Donald Sterling of the NFL. Did you see what he did to Kronke? He didn't work hard to sell PSLs because the money would go to offset building costs. He is, basically, a squatter for the next 19 years in LA, a city that won't support them, and then will move someone else. Quite unlikely that would be San Diego. The city and the NFL came up with a good deal to keep them in MV with a $900M stadium, plenty good for their needs. Spanos would only have had to put up some $200M. Dean knowingly demanded the impossible, a $1.3B stadium downtown that would block the expansion of the convention center. Voters told him, rightly so, to go pound sand.

Aztec stadium can be expanded but there will likely never be a reason for that. College football attendance has been decreasing, not increasing. UCLA puts some 43K people in a stadium that holds double that. The new stadium can be temporarily expanded to 40K or so for a bowl game. Neither Stanford or Cal are selling out. Small stadiums drive up demand for season tickets. Big stadiums mean you can just walk up on game day and buy a seat. That is why the Padres built Petco and that is why SDSU had issues with the Q even when they were paying $100k per year for it.

I agree with most of what you say but with due respect, UCLA is a really bad comparison. Not only is the quality of its football product on the field way down, contrary to U$C which other than the ground the Coliseum is on otherwise now owns the place and has substantially upgraded it, the Rose Bowl remains an archaic structure. Actually, the Rose Bowl is worse than archaic because the beige theater seats put in a couple decades ago never matched the vibe of the rest of the stadium and they now look like discolored dog poop: 

Rose Bowl Stadium Seating for UCLA Football - RateYourSeats.com

U$C averaged 60K per game in 2019.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Del Scorcho said:

reaction of everyone not included in the top of the SEC and seeing where college athletics is headed

tenor.gif

 

I don't know....does America really want a regional AAA/D-League southern semi-pro league?  Half of these SEC schools are shit academically.   

I am not 100% sure the Pac12 needs to worry about trying to follow them down that direction.  If the Pac can take a shot at a "pro" team once a year but maintain their traditional/academics that could be a successful model. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Akkula said:

I don't know....does America really want a regional AAA/D-League southern semi-pro league?  Half of these SEC schools are shit academically.   

I am not 100% sure the Pac12 needs to worry about trying to follow them down that direction.  If the Pac can take a shot at a "pro" team once a year but maintain their traditional/academics that could be a successful model. 

maybe you're right, but my fear is that we're seeing a pro-model develop minus the salary caps, draft, and free agency rules that keeps professional athletics somewhat competitive. Its killing the golden goose of amateur athletics

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Del Scorcho said:

maybe you're right, but my fear is that we're seeing a pro-model develop minus the salary caps, draft, and free agency rules that keeps professional athletics somewhat competitive. Its killing the golden goose of amateur athletics

 

I think the question is do people really want to see the USFL, XFL, or CFL?  What exactly is college football with pro athletes anyway?  Perhaps we will see model that allows students who want to "go pro" the ability to transfer to the SEC freely after the season but they will need to lock in to a real college during the season and play for their scholarship only.  We also need to see coaches and everyone else getting fat on the student athletes get a big haircut.  The athletes are right that there are too many people exploiting them to get rich.

  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sactowndog said:

Yeah the elites are going to lose viewership because they can’t compete with the NFL.  
 

And I think you meant the P4 elites.   Most of the remaining 8 are such small states/Markets even the MWC wouldn’t consider them.  Realize most are in smaller DMA’s then Fresno.   Or they are in slightly larger DMA’s than Fresno with more competition.  

Yeah, I sometimes still refer to the in the present tense. We could be down to the Power 3 pretty quick too, if the B1G raids the PAC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Akkula said:

I think the question is do people really want to see the USFL, XFL, or CFL?  What exactly is college football with pro athletes anyway?  Perhaps we will see model that allows students who want to "go pro" the ability to transfer to the SEC freely after the season but they will need to lock in to a real college during the season and play for their scholarship only.  We also need to see coaches and everyone else getting fat on the student athletes get a big haircut.  The athletes are right that there are too many people exploiting them to get rich.

I don't know what "people" want to see, but I know I could not care less about B1G/SEC/ACC/B12 conferences.  I only watch tSDSU football and those teams in our conference. And the PAC should just stay as they are. Well, ideally they cut loose OSU/WSU, but their regional west/mtn centric model is perfect. They really don't need to and shouldn't join the arms race. Sure, I'd love for my Aztecs to join the PAC because it is the absolute best fit geographically for them, but the MWC has its good points too. I know and like the schools in both the PAC and the MWC. I'd be happy to just draw a north-south line at the east side of Colorado and put the rest of the college football world out of sight and out of mind.   

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Aztec1984 said:

And that is not good for your program.

Not when MWC teams come in........but it does give UNLV the chance to bring in some bigger programs & their fans 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Den60 said:

It isn't like the SEC hasn't been in control before this move, it's not like they haven't been making tons more money that G5 schools. We are already third tier and that isn't really going to change. You have the P5 elites, the rest of the P5 schools, and then the G-5 schools (which has higher and lower value schools). Will the G5 eventually get locked out of the college playoffs? Sure. They are eventually going to be closer to 32 BCS schools than 48 or 64. The elites are looking to challenge the NFL.  But, there will still be a market for college football in San Diego and other G5 cities.

Perhaps you are correct.  As much as I've tried I've never been able to accurately predict the future with any type of consistency. 

That said, I see the difference now being NIL. I am not sure fans realize the potential ramifications of this.  There will be no control over any of it.  Donors & boosters will decide to pay athletes to go to a particular school.  This will mostly happen in the major sports at the big money schools but will also happen in minor sports that most fans don't care about.  This will further the already unfair playing fields which exist for amateur college athletes.  Athletic departments will start seeing boosters give money to athletes instead of the athletic department.  Athletic departments already run at deficits.  They will now be greater than before.  And long term I can see some schools deciding they don't need to be involved with this at all.  Probably wrong but I see eventually only those who have profitable athletic departments wanting to deal with it and only those who are invited to the big boy conference will be profitable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Someone Else said:

Perhaps you are correct.  As much as I've tried I've never been able to accurately predict the future with any type of consistency. 

That said, I see the difference now being NIL. I am not sure fans realize the potential ramifications of this.  There will be no control over any of it.  Donors & boosters will decide to pay athletes to go to a particular school.  This will mostly happen in the major sports at the big money schools but will also happen in minor sports that most fans don't care about.  This will further the already unfair playing fields which exist for amateur college athletes.  Athletic departments will start seeing boosters give money to athletes instead of the athletic department.  Athletic departments already run at deficits.  They will now be greater than before.  And long term I can see some schools deciding they don't need to be involved with this at all.  Probably wrong but I see eventually only those who have profitable athletic departments wanting to deal with it and only those who are invited to the big boy conference will be profitable.

Who will win the Kentucky Derby next year?

Link to post
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.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...