College Football “Super League”?

[Mavric]

 

[knapplc]

Is the current model "dead" or does it just not make enough money for certain people?

 

Because I liked the college football model from, say, ten years ago. Even 20.

 

But the current model, where millions of dollars flow through NIL collectives, where a guy can transfer from Alabama to Iowa, collect a huge bag, and then transfer back to Alabama without playing a single snap or even practicing with Iowa?

 

Yeah, that "model" is crap.

[brophog]

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

Is the current model "dead" or does it just not make enough money for certain people?

 

 

The problem is the courts have been pretty clear that it's going to be a wild west out there without some sort of collective bargaining. Between that and Title IX concerns and all of that and it's sorta no win situation. Everyone agrees this current path is neither sustainable nor good for anyone.

[TGHusker]

14 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

Pay wall.  Do you have a summary?

[GSG]

32 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Pay wall.  Do you have a summary?

 

My guess is something like this

 

 

[hskrpwr13]

36 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Pay wall.  Do you have a summary?

 

Essentially, the top 70 programs (basically the schools that made up what were the P5 conferences + a few others) would be split into 10 conferences/regions. An additional 10 schools (some G5 members) would appear in a relegation conference. Article doesn't explain how relegation would work for this conference. The initial 70 would not be subject to relegation. 

 

The winner of each of the 8 conferences + wildcards would qualify for a playoff.

 

Unequal revenue sharing was mentioned as a possibility.

[Red Five]

47 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Pay wall.  Do you have a summary?

A) The Athletic is a great source for sports/CFB info. Well worth the subscription if you can find a special they run a few times a year.
 

B) Influential CFB people are pushing for a 80 team league (70 teams fixed, 10 teams can go up/down based on records).Colletive bargaining with players, one TV contract for all 80 team. 

 

But it’s nothing to worry about right now because it doesn’t have B1G or SEC backing (because they would be taking a pay cut to do this).

 

 

[Toe]

Quote

Thus far, the group is struggling to gain traction with the schools that would play in their proposed “Super League.” The ACC board of directors heard a presentation from the group in February. However, planned dinners with administrators from the Big Ten, SEC and Big 12 all were called off. Spokespersons for the Big Ten and SEC said commissioners Petitti and Greg Sankey, respectively, have not met with Perna’s group.

 

Leagues have been hesitant and canceled meetings so as not to upset their current broadcast partners, including ESPN and Fox, according to one executive briefed on the commissioners’ thoughts.

 

[TGHusker]

56 minutes ago, Red Five said:

A) The Athletic is a great source for sports/CFB info. Well worth the subscription if you can find a special they run a few times a year.
 

B) Influential CFB people are pushing for a 80 team league (70 teams fixed, 10 teams can go up/down based on records).Colletive bargaining with players, one TV contract for all 80 team. 

 

But it’s nothing to worry about right now because it doesn’t have B1G or SEC backing (because they would be taking a pay cut to do this).

 

 

Thanks

This guy, in the article link below,  has a unique way of 'fixing the problem' - 4 regional groups of 16 -  I immediately noticed that he doesn't have Minnesota, NW, Indiana and Rutgers in the Tier 1 group.   He then elaborates on how a schedule would work and how players would be paid based on Tier. 

 

 

https://washedmedia.com/blog/i-fixed-college-football

Tier 1

Tier 2

 

[PasstheDamnBallGuy]

Ok that region would be perfect and also hilarious how close it would be to us just being back in the big 12. 

[Display name required]

Why  would the big ten and SEC want that they have a money advantage over other leagues why would they give that up 

[Guy Chamberlin]

It doesn't get talked about much, but conference realignment has been 100% driven by football, and most schools have another 20+ athletic programs forced to follow along. The Pac 10 and ACC/Big10 mergers in particular will add a large burden to sports that can't afford it, especially the travel schedules that aren't conducive to athletes, students, and tight budgets. 

 

I'm wondering if the growth of women's volleyball and men's and women's basketball might allow other people in on the decision. A return to geographic alignment could make a lot of sense for both monetary and rivalry reasons. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

2 minutes ago, Display name required said:

Why  would the big ten and SEC want that they have a money advantage over other leagues why would they give that up 

 

Massive contract renegotiating when the time comes, with broadcasting entities giving the Big 10 and SEC no choice but to play along. Go ahead and let them keep their name and brand, but they go back to geographic roots that aren't even a generation old. Even with more equitable distribution, it's certainly possible these conferences could get more money from the new college sports landscape than they have now. 

[hskrpwr13]

It would be interesting to know what entities would have the decision maker power.

 

Is it the conference commissioners? Would the conference schools get or have to vote on it? 

 

Is it individual schools? Do the schools with the top 10% of brand revenue get to choose the model and revenue distribution?

 

Is it the television networks? Do they get to choose which schools most benefit financially?

 

Does the NCAA get a voice?

 

Who gets to decide who gets to decide?

 

[Display name required]

15 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Massive contract renegotiating when the time comes, with broadcasting entities giving the Big 10 and SEC no choice but to play along. Go ahead and let them keep their name and brand, but they go back to geographic roots that aren't even a generation old. Even with more equitable distribution, it's certainly possible these conferences could get more money from the new college sports landscape than they have now. 

It would be good for college sports but we could lose a huge advantage over non big ten and sec schools and it’s vary possible that we would make less money at the same time