What is the End Game with Realignment?

[Mike Jackson]

I really hope I am wrong but I see this as the beginning of the end of CFB as we know and love it.  You just can't march the money train backwards or employ real revenue sharing that makes the other USA Sports Leagues successful.  Either these new media rights deals will be wildly profitable for the outlets and they will subsequently have to pay the players or they will expand the playoff to 16 with a smaller field of teams playing at the FBS level.  The regular season product will be deluded even more.  In 2032 the networks will have the data to figure out the viability of these super conference media rights deals and I don't think the numbers will be as good as they hope for.    There will be an uptick for the SEC at least early on if Texas and OU are good.  But the reality of the viewership numbers of UCLA & USC games versus all those middle tier Big 10 teams looking just like the viewership numbers of those LA teams versus the all the middle and lower tier Pac 12 teams they play now.

[RBP79]

Money and egos never have a positive effect on any situation.

[greenminer]

The only thing that directly influences how much CFB I watch is availability: is it somehow available for me to watch/consume?

If every single CFB game were available for free on my TV, I would watch A TON.  Start with my schools, then work my way outward: conference foes, conference title implications.  From there, maybe some secondary schools and/or anything that plays into the national title chase.  Maybe a generational talent that needs to be seen before moving onto the NFL.  Reggie Bush was the reason I watched USC years ago.

That (100% availability) is hypothetical, obviously, and would never come to fruition.

Realignment plays into broadcasts availability.  Basically, it has an indirect impact on how much I consume.

Edited July 4 by greenminer

[NT80]

I guess because always being an NT fan I've always been attracted to the underdog schools against the big dog schools.  Love those upsets way more than two mega $ schools fighting over more $.  

[southsideguy]

What I fear is we are going to get pay for view.

[greenminer]

1 hour ago, southsideguy said:

What I fear is we are going to get pay for view.

Do we start lumping CFB into a conversation about the wealth gap? Do some sports become an outlet for the wealthy, meaning a segment of the market (FBS) becomes so expensive that more and more of us simply cannot afford it, or don't want to pay the high $$ to get access?  Seems like boxing is a lot like that already.

Is that a giant leap or not? sorry but wanted to make y'all think.  Imagine a world where FBS (upper P5?) as we know it IS pay-per-view, and the only reasonable access for the majority is G5, FCS, or below.

[Mike Jackson]

On 7/4/2022 at 10:21 PM, southsideguy said:

What I fear is we are going to get pay for view.

I really don’t think that will happen unless big decision makers forget the lesson the decline of boxing taught them.  You can only sell false hope to the bottom half of the top 80 programs by revenue so long.  I say 80 because I believe at least half of FBS programs won’t be viable for financially to continue to compete with the new FBS.  If if schools like Stanford drop down to FCS or kill football altogether it could get really bad.   These huge schools are trying to drop conference “dead weight” schools but they hurt the middle tier programs.  If you aren’t elite but in the 2 mega conferences non-conference games are the fun games for your fans.  They don’t have the product to support pay per view without the collective taking a huge financial bath.  The Longhorns Network is basically pay per view and ESPN lost money on it.  (Even forcing it into the sports packages of people who didn’t want the channel).

Either way I am watching less over the long haul.  The year before Nebraska, Missouri, and A&M left the drama of the bad blood made me watch more.  But once they settled into the SEC & Big 10 and the matchups were no longer brand new I watched considerably less.

[meanJewGreen]

51 minutes ago, Mike Jackson said:

I really don’t think that will happen unless big decision makers forget the lesson the decline of boxing taught them.  You can only sell false hope to the bottom half of the top 80 programs by revenue so long.  I say 80 because I believe at least half of FBS programs won’t be viable for financially to continue to compete with the new FBS.  If if schools like Stanford drop down to FCS or kill football altogether it could get really bad.   These huge schools are trying to drop conference “dead weight” schools but they hurt the middle tier programs.  If you aren’t elite but in the 2 mega conferences non-conference games are the fun games for your fans.  They don’t have the product to support pay per view without the collective taking a huge financial bath.  The Longhorns Network is basically pay per view and ESPN lost money on it.  (Even forcing it into the sports packages of people who didn’t want the channel).

Either way I am watching less over the long haul.  The year before Nebraska, Missouri, and A&M left the drama of the bad blood made me watch more.  But once they settled into the SEC & Big 10 and the matchups were no longer brand new I watched considerably less.

So much of college football is about regional rivalries. There was an article I read recently about WVU fans still pining for the days where they played Penn State and Pitt frequently. Rivalries like nebraska/OU, KU/Mizzou, and now ones like USC/Cal, the apple cup will all go away too because of this. Obviously realignment has benefitted us in getting us with Texas schools, but I dont think people will care much about a UCLA- Iowa game or Arizona State- Baylor as much as people think they will. 

Heck... even Texas- Vanderbilt will get dumb after awhile

[meangreen11]

27 minutes ago, meanJewGreen said:

So much of college football is about regional rivalries.

Yes but there are some rivalries that will resume due to the latest rounds of realignment as well.  Texas and A&M will play on Thanksgiving again and that is going to generate a lot of interest in the state and nation.

[LitMedallion]

4 hours ago, meangreen11 said:

Yes but there are some rivalries that will resume due to the latest rounds of realignment as well.  Texas and A&M will play on Thanksgiving again and that is going to generate a lot of interest in the state and nation.

It will be interesting to see how/if Alabama will change their tune about playing Auburn, Tennessee, and LSU every year. It was really Tennessee/Alabama game that forced the SEC to create cross division permanent rivals during the 1992 expansion, but I just don't seen those 3 games not being played every year in the SEC. Then there's LSU/Florida, Auburn/Georgia, Tennessee/Florida. Having aTm/UT back is a plus.  

[Mike Jackson]

5 hours ago, meangreen11 said:

Yes but there are some rivalries that will resume due to the latest rounds of realignment as well.  Texas and A&M will play on Thanksgiving again and that is going to generate a lot of interest in the state and nation.

Not so fast if the playoffs are expanded or they have to schedule semi-final conference games before champion games.  The calendar doesn't work.  This is a big part of the reason the HBCU conferences don't play in the FCS playoffs overlap classic games.  

Edited July 6 by Mike Jackson

[Mike Jackson]

41 minutes ago, LitMedallion said:

It will be interesting to see how/if Alabama will change their tune about playing Auburn, Tennessee, and LSU every year. It was really Tennessee/Alabama game that forced the SEC to create cross division permanent rivals during the 1992 expansion, but I just don't seen those 3 games not being played every year in the SEC. Then there's LSU/Florida, Auburn/Georgia, Tennessee/Florida. Having aTm/UT back is a plus.  

I don't see how you fit all those rivalry games in, have coherent fair way to determine the conference championship game participants, and play 3 or 4 non-conference games.  Something has to give.  If you lengthen the season purely for revenue they will have to pay the players.  Some of the best players will starting sitting out regular season games 11 through 1# if they aren't getting paid.  And at anytime the NFLPA and Owners could agree to lower the minimum draft age.  Why let your defacto minor league wear more tread off the incoming talent for nothing? And with an expanded season and playoff CFB will be cutting into part of the TV calendar the NFL had all to themselves.  So a move to weaken a competing product while getting less beat up talent makes all the sense in the world.  If the USFL holds on that will be more reason to discount essential utility of CFB as a minor league.  So I could very easily see a meeting of the minds and CFB told in by the NFL no uncertain terms to "stay in your current calendar or else".  All this and the NFL also could take disregard the tradition of letting CFB have Saturday from September to second Saturday in December.   They already took Thursday away from CFB.  

 Joel Klatt was selling listeners of 1310 The Ticket a load of crap this afternoon imo.  The 4 mega conference scenario.