Yeah, those folks in the Northeast and far west are gonna LOVE an Auburn/Arkansas game over a USCw/Bama game... This is the future we are talking about and not the past.
I see your point for those conferences, but to create the super conferences ACC will be part of that consolidation. I just don't see anything happening quickly. JMO
You - and others - don't get it. See my post just above this one. It is ALL about TV ratings. This IS what is the future. Everything else is just a bunch of silly folk taking about "the good old days." Do you honestly think that national interest is going to want TWO teams from a pretty limited Alabama region and NONE from the VERY resourceful (and likely WAY more receptive to being sold) California? Why do you think there are TWO NFL teams playing in LA? Because the NFL could not allow that market to be unserved. That IS the way it will play out in the future. Stop focusing on the past and what feels "noble". It is obsolete. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. And try to realize what all this really means: we are talking about "AAA" ball. I never said, nor do I believe, that Auburn, USCe (or Clemson), Nebraska or Illinois will stop playing football. I said they won't be playing "AAA" ball. Oh, the indignity! Get used to it.
Agreed on the first part for sure... which makes no sense for the colleges to bear that. My guess is that the SEC and Big 10 will align in order to change that dynamic... just my opinion. I don't think the coaches, ADs or school presidents want what it has become. They can regain some control of that by aligning and creating a separate pathway. We'll see.
No comment on this: any type of unique offenses or defenses will be replaced by everyone running the same schemes AGREE! College football is now the NFL D League. That was the plan all along, set up a developmental league with no risk of failure for the NFL. The risk is all borne by CFB. On top of that, Fan bases are now expected to "PAY" for this entertainment by participating in the "auction" process. I DO NOT blame the players. They are working the system for individual benefit which is what every American is raised to do from birth.
It makes you wonder. How do the collectives know which players the coaches want and who to bid on if they aren't communicating with the coaches? It's all a big charade.
I'm beginning to look forward to the shadenfreude of watching college athletics reap the disasterous consequences of what they turned themselves into.
DING DING DING - Clay you are todays recipient of the "LOGIC" post of the week! I was LMAO at the posts saying.............Ohhhh Noooo - Coachs ain't involved in any of that. Thats all on the Collectives. Sure, and I want to make an offer on that 10,000' of Pacific waterfront in Kansas that just went on sale.
Hi LT. So many of us are in the same quandry. We love football. We love our College. It was a great marriage. You might remember the concept: I think they used to call it the "Student Athlete". A synergy between expanding the mind AND the body. Modern day Olympians but at institutions of learning. Amatuers, Playing Rivals, School Spirit, Bowls, The Old College try, Animal House (OK well maybe not), Local Traditions, UF vs UGA, Texas vs Oklahoma, Saturdays in the South, or anywhere college football is played. I do not believe for one damn second that the power brokers were concerned about the financial concerns of the young student athlete. Tea Gator is right, take a hard look at the visual medium, "T-V" and the "Money-Grab" by those executives. Who the hell is whispering in the ear of University presidents anyway? Yes, some here call it evolution, I call it for what it is..............G-R-E-E-D. Some will say - You will take the B.S. and LIKE IT. Well that is an option. But I do have other choices in life. I quit the NFL long ago. If this insanity keeps up I may go the same route with College Football.
Not exactly. LA has two NFL teams and add in the 49ers because the pro fan base will support it. If USCw, UCLA, Oregon and Washington were so popular, their TV deal from 10 years ago would have been much bigger. Bottom line is if you asked people on the west coast and the NE who your favorite team is, they are going to pick an NFL team, if you ask someone from the south (or midwest), you are going to get more people stating that a college team is their favorite. Just the difference in the cultures across the country.
I will respectfully disagree with a major part of your argument. Yes, it's all about TV ratings, but it's not about local TV ratings. It's about national TV ratings. That means it's all about "brands". I think you grossly underestimate the value of historical major national brands like Auburn, Clemson and Nebraska. These are 3 of the biggest multi-generational brands in college football and they will always drive big national TV ratings. They aren't going anywhere. It's the same reason that no matter how many games they may win, metro schools like UCF or a school from a small state like Boise State may never become national brands. In addition, I don't see the SEC and/or Big-10 ever trying to kick any existing members out of the conferences without cause. The only way I could ever see what you're suggesting happening is if the top SEC and Big-10 schools decided to leave their conference and start a brand new entity. It's possible, but I think pretty unlikely. Chances are that all the current SEC and Big-10 members will have a seat at the big boys table, even though some may not deserve it.
Two teams from Alabama. None from either North Carolina or Virginia? I absolutely disagree with your premise. It IS a new game. It is what it is.
And I will disagree with your take also. Everyone who lives in LA knows that the population is mainly transient and they loyally follow their old teams from "the old country". That did not stop the NFL from pushing the button. They HAD to have a team there and the Chargers was mainly about dinging SD for not acquiescing on their demands for a new stadium. And in that light, I can definitely see where there will be a San Diego Jaguars team sometime in the future.
Who said anything about no North Carolina or Virginia?! I absolutely think UNC will end up in the SEC or Big-10. UVA has a good shot too. Alabama and Auburn are 2 of the biggest brands in college football. I think you're wrong on that.
In 1997 there were 20 Bowl Games. Less than 20 years later there were 41. Additionally, FBS has expanded by over 25 teams in the last 30 years to 133. In 1991 the FBS (or Div 1A as it was know then) included conferences such as the MAC, the WAC, and the Moutain West, of which most teams could be arguably labelled as not playing top level football. There are even more non-competitive conferences now. Basically, the system is way overdue for a trimming of programs that shouldn't be in the top level of competition.
