Eat What You Kill

[NorthwoodHusker]

I think you have the old footprint, big eight, ten, PAC eight, acc, sec and sec.
The added teams will be the Zona schools, utahs, possibly Cincy or Houston and ucf type schools.
The newer add ons dont move the needle much, such as Memphis, USA, uab, liberty etc, fla atlantic, etc.

 

[Husker In Oklahoma]

Look at the history of cfb. Those 50-60 teams were nadda in the 70s and 80s and much of the 90s.
All those Florida teams, uab, usa, Memphis, there is so many that either didn't exist or weren't diddly then.
Another fact. There's slowly less and less alumni, so even the smaller schools are losing students.
To say this is what made college football great by almost doubling in size in 30 years just doesn't work.

I’m not talking about directional schools.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

I’m not talking about directional schools.

Then how do you not get to the 70 they are proposing? 130 isn't a deal breaker. There'll be few if any on the fence that aren't already on the other side of it already.

 

[NU_Alum]

Then how do you not get to the 70 they are proposing? 130 isn't a deal breaker. There'll be few if any on the fence that aren't already on the other side of it already.

There's a guy on Twitter that's pretty well connected in the B1G. He's been pretty good with info on this thing for 2 years running now. The revenue model just doesn't work beyond 40 schools. The remaining schools don't pull enough eyes and thus adding more will mean less money to the schools already in (Nebraska, Ohio State, Alabama, etc...). There's literally no financial incentive to the schools or Fox/ESPN to include more.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

There's a guy on Twitter that's pretty well connected in the B1G. He's been pretty good with info on this thing for 2 years running now. The revenue model just doesn't work beyond 40 schools. The remaining schools don't pull enough eyes and thus adding more will mean less money to the schools already in (Nebraska, Ohio State, Alabama, etc...). There's literally no financial incentive to the schools or Fox/ESPN to include more.

But those forty have to play somebody other.. This is why you're seeing that 70-80 number floated around.
I think of it this way, the majority of games will be played by the 40 playing the 40, the traditional fence sitters tagging along, bumping it to 60ish. Then the ten or so ne'er do Wells who've earned the right to get the big bucks for a year at least.
In a way, you are playing the farm teams, and makes more sense now with easy transfers to do so.

 

[NU_Alum]

But those forty have to play somebody other.. This is why you're seeing that 70-80 number floated around.
I think of it this way, the majority of games will be played by the 40 playing the 40, the traditional fence sitters tagging along, bumping it to 60ish. Then the ten or so ne'er do Wells who've earned the right to get the big bucks for a year at least.
In a way, you are playing the farm teams, and makes more sense now with easy transfers to do so.

The money comes from the 40 playing the 40. That draws large audiences. Michigan v. Syracuse isn't bringing much value. Michigan v. Nebraska, then v. Alabama, then v. Kentucky, then v. OSU, etc... People will watch more games.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

The money comes from the 40 playing the 40. That draws large audiences. Michigan v. Syracuse isn't bringing much value. Michigan v. Nebraska, then v. Alabama, then v. Kentucky, then v. OSU, etc... People will watch more games.

Yea
I'm not certain they think maximizing profits playing each other is healthy long term.
Unlike pro teams, college teams are much more local. They are aware of this, and its possible the risk of creating a 40 team brand could even lower viewer numbers.
There's one example, the pros that can't be fully emulated because of the locality in college sports.
Its why I think we see an extended blend thats well regionalized

 

[Hville]

Yea
I'm not certain they think maximizing profits playing each other is healthy long term.
Unlike pro teams, college teams are much more local. They are aware of this, and its possible the risk of creating a 40 team brand could even lower viewer numbers.
There's one example, the pros that can't be fully emulated because of the locality in college sports.
Its why I think we see an extended blend thats well regionalized

You are correct. What people have to realize is they are going to go after maximum profit. Those teams rated between 40 and 70 still make profit. Especially when they are playing against the top 40. Balancing it out to make money off 35 games a week instead of just 20 is well worth it. What they don't want is the other 60 that don't offer enough profit to make up what they are getting from it.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

You are correct. What people have to realize is they are going to go after maximum profit. Those teams rated between 40 and 70 still make profit. Especially when they are playing against the top 40. Balancing it out to make money off 35 games a week instead of just 20 is well worth it. What they don't want is the other 60 that don't offer enough profit to make up what they are getting from it.

When a team plays one of the top teams and gets their million or so, if thats their survival money, they don't want those teams. They likely have little farm team effect.

 

[Hville]

Yea
I'm not certain they think maximizing profits playing each other is healthy long term.
Unlike pro teams, college teams are much more local. They are aware of this, and its possible the risk of creating a 40 team brand could even lower viewer numbers.
There's one example, the pros that can't be fully emulated because of the locality in college sports.
Its why I think we see an extended blend thats well regionalized

Im not sure regionalized will be that big of a factor. It will come in behind competitiveness. I think they have already proved that regionals can be compromised for competitiveness.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

Im not sure regionalized will be that big of a factor. It will come in behind competitiveness. I think they have already proved that regionals can be compromised for competitiveness.

I can't see Hokie fans cheering for the Cavs, isu fans for the ditch chickens.
Over time possibly, but anything revenue and involving TV revenue its what you you done lately.
It may lead to that as haves and have nots create a noticeable competition gap.

 

[Hville]

I can't see Hokie fans cheering for the Cavs, isu fans for the ditch chickens.
Over time possibly, but anything revenue and involving TV revenue its what you you done lately.
It may lead to that as haves and have nots create a noticeable competition gap.

My reference was more towards regionalized divisions. I believe there was another thread here or another site that had us, iowa and Wisconsin in the same division as the big dogs but had other conferences with Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State in it as the big dogs and another conference that had Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Mississippi and Tennessee in it. That just isn't going to happen.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

My reference was more towards regionalized divisions. I believe there was another thread here or another site that had us, iowa and Wisconsin in the same division as the big dogs but had other conferences with Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State in it as the big dogs and another conference that had Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Mississippi and Tennessee in it. That just isn't going to happen.

Will they want a more broad approach, say coastal leagues, or more strict longitudinal or north south etc.
Demographics exist, and ideally you want those teams playing each other, but it gets muddy really quick in the east.
For instance, having the Cali teams playing the Zona schools add in byu and utah, geographically you have a division as pertains to location distances.
The Washington schools are separated with only Oregon as their nearest geographic rival.
We talk about the 500 mile radius, and while it can be stretched some, LA to wazzu is a trip.
People get paid well for these things, they may actually earn it here.

 

[Hville]

Will they want a more broad approach, say coastal leagues, or more strict longitudinal or north south etc.
Demographics exist, and ideally you want those teams playing each other, but it gets muddy really quick in the east.
For instance, having the Cali teams playing the Zona schools add in byu and utah, geographically you have a division as pertains to location distances.
The Washington schools are separated with only Oregon as their nearest geographic rival.
We talk about the 500 mile radius, and while it can be stretched some, LA to wazzu is a trip.
People get paid well for these things, they may actually earn it here.

I think geography will play a part but competitiveness will be the driver. You can’t put 5 teams in a division that are annually competing in the top 20 while others have 1 or 2. In other words, recreating the B1G east and west divisions we had.

 

[jpmandm]

But those forty have to play somebody other.. This is why you're seeing that 70-80 number floated around.
I think of it this way, the majority of games will be played by the 40 playing the 40, the traditional fence sitters tagging along, bumping it to 60ish. Then the ten or so ne'er do Wells who've earned the right to get the big bucks for a year at least.
In a way, you are playing the farm teams, and makes more sense now with easy transfers to do so.

What you're describing is what it is now.