(02-02-2018 04:25 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(02-02-2018 03:40 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-02-2018 11:34 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny how people tend to learn the wrong lessons from everything that happens in the past.
The European powers (not just France) invested in fixed fortifications to fight the next trench war from better developed infrastructure. Germany had a similar line and tried to do one on the coast. Everyone dashed to build battleships.

WAC 16 did not fail because 16 is an inherently bad number. WAC 16 failed because it prevented schools that desired to play each other annually from doing so and those schools soon figured out they could make more money on a per team basis as an 8 team league than 16. So why aren't the power conferences shrinking to a better number? Because they can make more larger.

If the SEC can be stronger and more profitable with 20 they would be seeking 6 members to help them do that.

For decades 7 or 8 was considered the ideal number then it became 9 or 10, then we heard to the point of exhaustion that 12 was perfect.

The perfect number is the number that best fits your goals and if the market changes (which it has always done) and the ideal number is 20 we will see conferences go to 20, if 16 is the ideal we will see 16 team leagues and if the changes make it better to be in a 9 member conference then there will be risk of that happening as well.

Amazes me so few understand this.

That said, since the TV began to see growing value in college media rights, the standard negotiating unit for college TV rights has continued to shrink. It began with the NCAA negotiating for all the schools as a single block. Then a consortium of conferences became the standard unit (CFA and the remaining NCAA). Then the conference became the standard unit of negotiation. Every time its been because a subset within a negotiating unit realized they could do better separately. As long as that driver exists, I see no reason that this trend towards smaller negotiating units will not continue. Eventually, the individual school will become the base negotiating unit. There may be a step or two between that future and the current configuration (say a P5 consolidation or uneven revenue sharing within conferences)--but eventually I think we end up with individual schools negotiating their own media contracts.

If the carriage model weakens further (I expect it will) or collapses (less likely) then it will could be that see schools demanding that they retain a number of games to sell on their own.

That's the logical next step, a creep into individual rights rather than a leap.

Well it started with every school being independent. But that was before TV. Conferences were formed for ease of scheduling and because rivalries will always be the driver of revenue for the programs.

I don't think we are going to a day where everything is independent again. Some leverage will be needed in dealing with uber wealthy international conglomerates so some form of a collective will be necessary. What I suspect will happen is consolidation in terms of the number of elite schools which may make conferences larger in size, but much fewer in number. Ken D's idea of a Mega 2 is not that farfetched whether at 20 or 24 members each. But that would be a reduction of what we call P schools from 65 to 48 or 40. The Tweener conferences he refers to might consist of non more than 24 schools.

The dividing line in revenue takes a dip below 71st position.

The G5 could, and probably should consolidate into two conferences of 24 to 36 schools and the rest don't belong in Division 1.

What I think you will see are regional divisions instead of small conferences dwelling within a collection of small divisions within a singular grouping which functions to organize officiating, negotiate contracts, and make schedules. And of course that is a conference. It's just that there will likely be just two of them in each class of schools and negotiating as a unit would be beneficial.