• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Conference Expansion: Stanford, California and SMU Join the ACC

Because they're independents and I had to put them somewhere. In this 64-team mish-mash proposal, do not assume being in the ACC is going to protect Wake.
 
Biff Tannen said:
Because they're independents and I had to put them somewhere. In this 64-team mish-mash proposal, do not assume being in the ACC is going to protect Wake.
Click to expand...
I’m not but we’re safer than those two, as well as OSU and Wazzu.
 
Tobacco Road said:
Put that dude in charge. It is so stupid simple but the people in charge are too simple and scared so they keep looking down following the dollar immediately in front of them that they can’t look up and plan for the big picture. So friggin stupid. Somebody make an argument against that.
Click to expand...

That’s actually the argument. They won’t plan for the big picture because they only care about the present and the immediate future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
LilburnDeac said:
That’s actually the argument. They won’t plan for the big picture because they only care about the present $$$ and the immediate future $$$$.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
And the bigger problem is that the power players could care less about everyone else.

You could introduce a system in which everyone makes SEC/Big Ten money and those programs would hate it.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
The bigger problem is that the power players could care less about everyone else.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Ohio State and Alabama aren’t going to support a system that spreads the power money out evenly among 64 programs.
 
PhDeac said:
And the bigger problem is that the power players could care less about everyone else.

You could introduce a system in which everyone makes SEC/Big Ten money and those programs would hate it.
Click to expand...
The top tier college football teams have been so in large part because they have more money and better facilities than the rest. They have gaudy records because they can routinely defeat those teams with lesser re$ource$. They won't go to an NFL style sharing model until the current one no longer works for them or they are forced to by outside pressure. Neil Gorsuch, their is more work to be done.
 
The top tier programs have generations of alums, boosters, donors, bandwagon fans, etc. that are always going to be superior numbers-wise and have the money to do whatever they want even if they suck at football- look at A&M- and attract the best players and coaches. NFL works because there is a draft and salary cap so in theory "worst" team gets the first picks for talent to keep level playing field. Of course the Cowboys are more profitable than the Jaguars but the draft should even it out. While NCAA is marching rapidly towards NFL-lite- don't see us having a draft/salary cap in foreseeable future.
 
Just because everyone is one big Football pot doesn’t mean there can’t be ways to distribute the pot in a fashion that acknowledges the varying levels of value to the pot.
Or, just let it be Wild West for football conferences as it currently is and move everything else back to regional conferences that make sense.
 
Kelly's idea makes a world of sense, and if the NCAA had its act together when the CFP started maybe we would have gotten there, but right now, the SEC and the Big 10 have advantages in money per school and exposure that they aren't going to give up for the good of the game. It's all about self-interest.

The only way the SEC and Big 10 might be willing to negotiate a more sensible college football world would be if some limitless source of income (like the PIF did in creating LIV) decided to back a group of non-Big 10 or SEC programs to the point where TV money became irrelevant (BTW, the other way the SEC and/or Big 10 might be willing to agree would be if the TV deals collapse because the model of following sports causes ESPN and NBC Sports to crumble). Very unlikely to happen, but not impossible as the SEC and Big 10 TV money is great as compared to what other conferences receive, but its peanuts compared to the money that the super-rich can throw around. If there is a Stanford grad that has made billions in the Tech industry, and he wants to direct his funds to Stanford football, the Cardinal could outspend every other school a 100 times over (kind of like what happened to SMU and the ACC; SMU raised $100 million+ over a weekend, and didn't need a TV contract).
 
Last edited:
I wonder if some of these teams that have joined the 2, I guess now "Super Conferences" for lack of a better word, will regret it from the standpoint of trying to make the playoffs? I mean, in the Big Ten you've got Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, USC, Washington, Oregon even teams that have made or been really close to the playoffs in the past like Michigan State and Wisconsin (not saying next year, but in sometime in the future). In the SEC you've got, Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Texas and then teams that can be good enough to make potential playoff run (in the future) in Ole Miss, Florida, Auburn and even Missouri (they might would be in a 12 team this year). So, the 12 playoff will consist of the 6 highest rated conference champs, so that leaves only 6 at-large bids. Now, through in teams in the ACC and Big 12 that have playoff potential and that a lot of good programs trying to get one of those 6 spots if they don't win the conference. Seems like to me from that standpoint, the PAC 12 teams would potential have an easier time getting in the new playoff staying in that conference. The PAC 12 would've easily gotten in 2 teams if the 12 team playoff were this year. I know all this conference realignment stuff is about the money, but the expanded playoff has the potential to create even more chaos then what we have. Plus, that's a tough row to hoe, especially in the SEC. A really good team could have 3 or 4 losses. At least however, a team like 2023 FSU wouldn't get completely screwed under the new playoff system.
 
Last edited:
liveanddiedeac said:
I wonder if some of these teams that have joined the 2, I guess now "Super Conferences" for lack of a better word, will regret it from the standpoint of trying to make the playoffs? I mean, in the Big Ten you've got Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, USC, Washington, even teams that have made or been really close to the playoffs in the past like Michigan State and Wisconsin (not saying next year, but in sometime in the future). In the SEC you've got, Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Texas and then teams that can be good enough to make potential playoff run (in the future) in Ole Miss, Florida, Auburn and even Missouri (they might would be in a 12 team this year). So, the 12 playoff will consist of the 6 highest rated conference champs, so that leaves only 6 at-large bids. Now, through in teams in the ACC and Big 12 that have playoff potential and that a lot of good programs trying to get one of those 6 spots if they don't win the conference. Seems like to me from that standpoint, the PAC 12 teams would potential have an easier time getting in the new playoff staying in that conference. The PAC 12 would've easily gotten in 2 teams if the 12 team playoff were this year. I know all this conference realignment stuff is about the money, but the expanded playoff has the potential to create even more chaos then what we have. Plus, that's a tough row to hoe, especially in the SEC. A really good team could have 3 or 4 losses. At least however, a team like 2023 FSU wouldn't get completely screwed under the new playoff system.
Click to expand...
It will almost definitely be going down to only the 5 highest rated conference champs receiving auto bids once the Pac-12 situation gets sorted out. Can't see anyway the SEC/Big Ten conglomerate treats the "new Pac-12" conference as a Power 5 league and allows it to remain the top 6 champs getting automatic bids.

Also, Oregon is aghast that you left them out of potential playoff teams in the new Big 10 in favor of USC and Wisconsin.... :p
 
uncaboref said:
It will almost definitely be going down to only the 5 highest rated conference champs receiving auto bids once the Pac-12 situation gets sorted out. Can't see anyway the SEC/Big Ten conglomerate treats the "new Pac-12" conference as a Power 5 league and allows it to remain the top 6 champs getting automatic bids.

Also, Oregon is aghast that you left them out of potential playoff teams in the new Big 10 in favor of USC and Wisconsin.... :p
Click to expand...
Yeah, that was definitely unintentional.
 
DownEastDeac said:


Makes sense, which is why it prob won't happen
Click to expand...

It makes total sense. There is no reason for UCLA or Cal to have to send their softball to Florida or North Carolina to play a conference game. If football wants to be treated differently fine, no problem, but keep the "regional" conferences for everything else.
 
SCDeac said:
I cant' understand why ESPN would want to pay more to have F$U in the SEC. They already have them in the ACC on the "cheap". Why pay more to just move the deck chairs around?
Click to expand...
have been thinking about this - I think we are only viewing ratings as transitive, meaning we believe that if FSU changed conferences, their current ACC television ratings would stay the same no matter where they went. A different way to think about it, is that if FSU was matched up weekly with more competitive teams/larger brand teams, their ratings would increase because the matchups would be more enticing.

Team 1 has X fans
Team 2 has Y fans

Viewership of their game isn’t just X+Y,
it’s X+Y+Z (Z being neutral fans intrigued by the matchup)

In the case of ACC vs SEC/Big 10, it’s certain that the Z variable of potential viewers in those conferences is much higher than in the ACC.
 
liveanddiedeac said:
It makes total sense. There is no reason for UCLA or Cal to have to send their softball to Florida or North Carolina to play a conference game. If football wants to be treated differently fine, no problem, but keep the "regional" conferences for everything else.
Click to expand...
That goes against the general philosophy of one conference for all sports f any given school.
 
Deaconblue said:
That goes against the general philosophy of one conference for all sports f any given school.
Click to expand...
Well as you know times are a changing, having all sports play in a conference that is spread across the entire country, goes against the philosophy of common sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top