Re: A new and better FBS thread
Where is all the talk coming from about a poison pill that would allow the upper conference to "slam the door shut" and stop participating in relegation?
In a simple scenario only the bottom two teams that would get relegated would have to worry about moving down and realistically the top 6 will largely be the same year in and year out. Those top 6 don't have to worry about being relegated so they don't give a shit about slamming the door shut. IMO the relegation model drives $$$ from TV/Streaming networks and by slamming the door shut those "haves" run the risk of not being as valuable on their own.
Yes it's unlikely to happen but it's funny to me how many say it can't or won't happen based on the old way of doing things.
Choose to stay in the G5, get G5 $$ or doing something innovative and drive your revenue up near the upper end G5 and lower P4/5 conferences?
Re: A new and better FBS thread
This would be amazing and lots of fun. Two reasons why I don’t think it will happen.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bisonaudit
They’re on the wrong side of the fence and the gate is welded shut today. If they do nothing it stays that way.
Pretty sure the Presidents and ADs are already worried about getting fired if their football team has a bad year.
I have no illusions about this thing actually happening but these seem like insubstantial reasons for why it won’t work.
They’re all on the same side of the fence right now. Everyone who is a decision maker at any of those schools currently has a job and things are peachy. The schools each get a $17M payout from the conference. If they sit on their hands they’ll get an even bigger payout when the PAC2 suck it up and join.
If you’re any one of SDSU, UNLV, Colorado State, Boise State, Utah State, Air Force or Fresno State, you run the risk of all the others being in the top half with WSU and OSU when they decide to cut anchor. Then you’re stuck in a conference with Nevada, New Mexico, SJSU, Hawaii and a couple FCS call ups. That new MW is paying closer to $1.7M a year. And you now get to explain what the hell happened in every job interview for the rest of your life.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Professor Chaos
Wouldn't that still be a good thing from NDSU's POV??? It was always in NDSU's best interest to have the Pac raid the MWC so if this is what it takes so be it. I'd agree that the promotion/relegation is unlikely but I don't think it's as outlandish as you do. If it gives value to the Pac-2 and enough of the MWC to make it so they can use it as an excuse to combine while maintaining the Pac name and assets while avoiding the gargantuan MWC exit fees it leaves the same expansion opportunities for western based FCS schools into (what's left of) the MWC.
I didn’t say it wouldn’t be good for NDSU. I said it would never happen.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TAILG8R
Where is all the talk coming from about a poison pill that would allow the upper conference to "slam the door shut" and stop participating in relegation?
In a simple scenario only the bottom two teams that would get relegated would have to worry about moving down and realistically the top 6 will largely be the same year in and year out. Those top 6 don't have to worry about being relegated so they don't give a shit about slamming the door shut. IMO the relegation model drives $$$ from TV/Streaming networks and by slamming the door shut those "haves" run the risk of not being as valuable on their own.
Yes it's unlikely to happen but it's funny to me how many say it can't or won't happen based on the old way of doing things.
Choose to stay in the G5, get G5 $$ or doing something innovative and drive your revenue up near the upper end G5 and lower P4/5 conferences?
Where is all the talk coming from that now all of the sudden both the PAC2 and every mountain west school is getting more money doing this vs those schools just joining the conference?
And where is the talk coming from that the other power conferences will just let the PAC pretend to be a power conference again?
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NDSU92
Where is all the talk coming from that now all of the sudden both the PAC2 and every mountain west school is getting more money doing this vs those schools just joining the conference?
And where is the talk coming from that the other power conferences will just let the PAC pretend to be a power conference again?
I guess from my perspective the PAC2 is currently worth about $.03 on a TV deal. Just because they USED to get $17m/yr doesn't mean that is what they can command now. Especially after losing all the schools that mattered and sucking up schools from a league that gets like $5m/yr.
And because the reason ANYTHING happens is money.
So if you are the PAC2 and the top of the MWC you can either look at joining and bringing in maybe $6-7m/yr on a TV deal or come up with some crazy in your face Coach Prime type shit that will demand attention and eyeballs and maybe push that to $15m/yr
So again, why would the top 8 teams in this scenario all of a sudden slam the door shut and go back to being an also ran conference getting what would most likely be a lesser TV deal than they had by being in a unique situation of the relegation model?
IF this were to happen and that is a massive if, I would be willing to bet it would be the start of a wider relegation model in college football. So maybe, just maybe(again .000001% chance) they will get support behind the scenes from TV/Streaming, NCAA, etc that would have some skin in the game to come up with a model to replace the current FBS all in one boat model with something that could potentially create more revenue. Everyone says the break of G5 and P5 won't happen because of money, well relegation is one way to make it happen and drive more $$ because more than 3-4 games a week matter to the larger audience.
OK taking my tinfoil hat back off and setting it on the desk for now.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
That McFeely article had a quote that I found really interesting…
“ Dellenger wrote the schedule could include:
A Bracket Buster Weekend in early to mid-November, where pairings are determined two weeks prior and are based off of current standings with the intent on arranging compelling, crossover matchups. The entire season builds up to a crescendo of a final week that features three games:
- A Relegation Game between the sixth- and seventh-placed teams in the Pac-12. The loser is relegated to the Mountain West. The eighth-place finisher in the regular season is automatically relegated.
- A Promotion Game between the second- and third-placed teams in the Mountain West. The winner is promoted to the Pac-12. The regular-season champion of the Mountain West is automatically promoted to the Pac-12.
- The Pac-12 championship game, where the winner has a significant chance to advance to the newly expanded College Football Playoff.”
I find all of those hypothetical games wildly more interesting than any bowl games and at least as interesting, if not more interesting, than the conference championship games.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
A conference championship game in an 8 team conference where everyone plays everyone makes little sense to me but $$$$.
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bisonaudit
A conference championship game in an 8 team conference where everyone plays everyone makes little sense to me but $$$$.
The Big 12, when they were 10 teams, played a full round robin but still played the conference championship game after a few years of not doing it. IIRC they were more concerned about strengthening the resume of their champion to get them into the 4 team playoff since the other P5 league champs got a chance to put up impressive wins in conference title games right before the selection committee released their final rankings.
Of course I'm sure the extra money doesn't hurt either.
A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
heffray
That McFeely article had a quote that I found really interesting…
“ Dellenger wrote the schedule could include:
A Bracket Buster Weekend in early to mid-November, where pairings are determined two weeks prior and are based off of current standings with the intent on arranging compelling, crossover matchups. The entire season builds up to a crescendo of a final week that features three games:
- A Relegation Game between the sixth- and seventh-placed teams in the Pac-12. The loser is relegated to the Mountain West. The eighth-place finisher in the regular season is automatically relegated.
- A Promotion Game between the second- and third-placed teams in the Mountain West. The winner is promoted to the Pac-12. The regular-season champion of the Mountain West is automatically promoted to the Pac-12.
- The Pac-12 championship game, where the winner has a significant chance to advance to the newly expanded College Football Playoff.”
I find all of those hypothetical games wildly more interesting than any bowl games and at least as interesting, if not more interesting, than the conference championship games.
100% and those games instantly become nationally televised games on ESPN or whatever major linear channel you partner with.
Do or die relegation and promotion games before the playoffs and bowls … $$$$$$$$$
And as far as not knowing who you’re playing or where, does it matter at all? As long as you have two weeks notice and the conference pays for travel and logistics it’s a win win. Extra home game for the “top seeded” team in each of the two games. Playoff atmosphere in week 11.
There are a lot of details to figure out and that’s an under statement but this is the kind of shit that the TV schedulers drool over.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
