We'll be fine as is.
Conference Realignment, Naming Rights, Financing
I was just happy we weren't mentioned with those "less valuable" loserz!
Considering it was the P12 who put them there, I'm not sure I'd characterize it that way.
Regarding Illinois and any of the teams that churn in the middle to bottom of the conference over the past few decades, I think the conference finds value in having those teams and we're actually in an enviable position that's not likely to change (anymore than anything is guaranteed in college sports). The current landscape (sad to say) gives the P2 leverage and they want to exploit it. From what I've read, the battle is for lucrative playoff spots, and the P2 don't want the existing committee to have the power to award those, since they might not be biased towards the P2.
I think the 12 team format is a cool idea they should let run before changing, but my guess is the P2 will succeed in forcing a bigger playoff with more guarantees for them, and do it as quickly as possible. 2026 is going to look different, and probably not better.
I find the big money league sports informative. The regular season gets watered down pretty drastically and the playoffs become their own season. That's how fans ultimately spend the most time/money on the sport. It seems inevitable that college football will head that way despite the groans. There's a lot of wrinkles to college that might make it play out differently, and I could see a crisis for programs outside the major conferences where programs can't keep up and are shuttered. Really hard to predict all this.
Illini92and96
- Austin, TX
Going to16 teams is such an obvious change and has to be considered inevitable. They already have the extra round, and can add two more ($$) games without increasing the overall playoff timeline. Beyond 16 and you are adding an extra week to the playoffs, which the merits would be debated for the impact on the "student athletes".
Are they "student athletes", or are they "employees"?
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
Superheroes and expanded universes and CGI driven spectacles are ultimately how moviegoers spend the most money at the theaters.
What happens when that's not true anymore?
One lesson is realizing that the cynicism of "just feed them more of the slop, who cares if it's good" was not the savvy long term business move it seemed when the sun was shining.
While I completely agree with the sentiment here, I've followed college sports long enough to know there's no way to stop the schools and their representatives from chasing the most money possible, almost always defined in the short to medium term. If viewership trends down, that's a problem for another day.
And in their defense, the ACC thought they were locking in a great long-term contract, and it was a disaster. Looking 3-5 years out is about all you can ask for. Past that it's a crap shoot.
Mr. Tibbs
- southeast DuPage
as recently as 2020, when we were waist deep in covid, no one could really predict any of the following:
- the Pac12 dissolving and the 4 top football schools joining the B1G
- the creation & existence of the revolving door transfer portal
- NIL for everyone with some quarterbacks getting 1 million per annum
- the ACC media deal being horsecrap compared to the SEC and B1G
about the only thing we could predict was
-the eventual move of UT & OU to the SEC. All the other school moves were kind of surprises really
-the expansion of the CFP to 12 (and likely to 16 in the near future )
-basketball revenues and media (save March Madness) really not that valuable despite the ACC & Big East wishing they were
four major changes above that I defy anyone to find an article predicting just 4 1/2 years ago
redwingillini11
White and Sixth
- North Aurora
Well if you want to keep Mizzou on the schedule, having it be part of a B1G-SEC challenge is the way to do it I guess...
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
The first was a genuine shock.
2 and 3 were products of a decade-long slide of the NCAA having no legal and especially no PR leg to stand on anymore with its amateurism model, but desperate to forestall any of the school's revenue being claimed directly by the players, they just threw everything else overboard to try to keep the ship afloat. And the thing about it is, the NCAA played make-believe that universal free transfers and NIL weren't the total revolution any intelligent observer immediately knew they would be.
And the 4th was 100% obvious the moment the contract (and especially the grant of rights) was signed. The ACC voluntarily guaranteed itself a below-market deal in the name of ensuring conference stability. The reaction that very day was "I can't believe Clemson and Florida State signed that". And people who style themselves as savvy insiders have been claiming the grant of rights could never stand up in court every day since, but as I have always told you, here we still are.
The only institution of power in college sports that holds any leverage against the Big Two closing off the top level of the sport for themselves is the CFP Selection Committee, and even that is subject to change in the future.
I'm interest to see to what extent the committee understands themselves that way. This is a war and the majority on that committee is tied to schools the Big Two is openly seeking to destroy. They *should* give as few bids to the Big Two as they can possibly get away with while maintaining their legitimacy.