So, if you thought that this thread...

Non-Autonomous Conferences Coordinated Reorganization

... might have been the result of a substantial amount of down time, you were right. Wife and I try to get away to the beach in September as often as it works out, and it's good to just let the mind relax and play with things that are in need of some resolution but don't actually matter in any way in the real world.

We're home now, but after about 600 miles of driving, with a pit stop to see some family, there was ample opportunity to play a little more.

The question came to mind that, given how the previous concept attempted to work out something that purposely wasn't comprehensive, what might a comprehensive concept look like?

And more than just "a" concept, what might it look like to design something that could be considered "supercharged" in terms of the benefits it gives to the non-auto conference members, plus Army?

Got a chance today to put it all into print, and for better or worse, here's that.

Found this from Pete Thamel of Yahoo Sports, who's been a persistent writer on the realignment topic for the last 10-15 years as I recall...



He's also made his own "back-of-a-napkin" proposal, but I think he uses that phrase to suggest he hasn't really given much thought to it. If I may be so bold/arrogant without penalty, my guess is that he'd see more value in one of the two proposals I've suggested.


And, too, inside the same story, there's this nudge that yes, the tectonic plates continue to move toward more well-distributed (as opposed to more concentrated) talent across college football...



... which is an argument for greater collaboration among the non-auto schools, instead of hanging on to the illusion that any non-auto conference is, on its own, able to lift itself into some auto-conference-like payday.


Capitalize on what you've got, non-auto schools. You're leaving money on the table because you're divided and fighting for scraps among yourselves. Get it together. Be a unified force.

Conference alignments are about more than geography. Imaginary lines on a map are not reason alone to throw schools together that have zero in common otherwise.

In a football-only conference arrangement among non-autos, there is one very common interest shared by every one of them, from the largest budget or biggest market to the least budget or least market.

They don't necessarily have to group themselves by geography.

They do necessarily have to begin working together as a collaborative group, instead of against each other in 5 cliques. Whatever the master design, they need exactly that--a master design--under a paradigm that attempts to raise the tide for all.

It's analogous to having 5 competing labor unions. The non-autos all have the same ultimate interest, and it's to their detriment to allow others to play them against each other. Get it together, and use the power of the whole to achieve better... whether under something more like the former proposal or this proposal, or whatever other proposal.

Played around with an ascension/relegation concept something like this one years ago...

https://lwosports.com/2021/07/27/college...alignment/



... but whereas the non-autos all have a common interest and thus it's largely just a matter of conviction and principle keeping them from doing something in all of their common interest (per this and the preceding proposal)... the level of cooperation among multiple competing interests that is needed to ever forge something like this is just too far beyond reasonable to envision.

Everyone is hell bent on making "order" and "organization" out of the chaos of conference realignment.

It's chaos because it's based on individual self interest. Everyone is always going to act upon THAT, because they have no reason to give up an advantage.

"One for all, and all for own" doesn't work because the Group of Five, acting united as one group... doesn't gain any advantage from that to make up any ground on the P5, and the "top half" of the G5 would be giving up their advantage over the bottom half of the G5. So why do it?

First, while I'm about to disagree and say why, I do appreciate the comment and your attempt to counter what's been said.

1. Advantage? What advantage? There is no "advantage" of any significance. It's competing over small potatoes. One school gets one NY6 bid. And what TV contract benefit there might be currently for some schools (a) is not impressive when taken in context (see #2), and (b) regardless, a future collaborative TV contract still can be structured in a way that rewards those games/schools whose ratings are most lucrative.

2. It has indeed been about individual self-interest as you stated, @JSchmack. And exactly what great reward has come from that? Even as the gulf in talent level continues to progressively shrink and it becomes increasingly routine that non-auto schools play well, if not win, against auto schools, the proportion of revenue going to the auto schools is staggering in comparison to the pittance that the non-autos receive.

3. We've tried it the self-interest way. And for 95% of non-auto schools, there is precious little chance they'll ever ascend out of non-auto status. There is no serious reward by continuing to do what has always been done, and to poach and backfill.

It's high time to try, instead, collaboration. It's time to try marketing innovations and structure innovations and scheduling innovations and still other innovations... most of which the autos would never try because they are dug-in exponentially deeper in the individual self-interest paradigm than the non-autos. And in many ways, that condition only predicts further staleness and rigidity.

4. The concept above, if I say so myself, is substantially more interesting than anything ever done before at the auto level, or for that matter at any level of college football ever. Fans tend to take interest in games where there is some consequence to the winner and loser... nothing new there, as that's always been the case. When you structure the standings and the schedule in a way that optimizes that, you've put the non-autos in a position that they've never been in to generate revenues.

https://theathletic.com/2844281/2021/09/...-a-target/

_sturt_ it is no longer Troy State but just Troy.

(Thx... fixed.)

Sitting here loving another year of NFL Red Zone, and drawn to the thought of how Goal Line fell short... here's one conversation on this very board that spoke to that...




... all of which seems altogether relevant to the topic of this thread began last week.

That is, it's further testimony, when you think about it, to how the Non-Autos could very legitimately collaborate in the spirit of the little engine that could, and raise the specter of the football product in ways that the big money conferences and their schools cannot or would not.

So, to this specific point, I can imagine a contract that includes a provision for those last 4 weeks of the regular season in which the kickoff-start times of the #1s vs. #1s games, the #2s vs. #2s games, and all other games having some implication to the division championships (which of course, in turn, all have implication to the conference championship games, and inherently as well, teams' regard among the CFP selection committee) are all coordinated to overlap and maximize the opportunity for live look-ins.

And circling back to what caused the thought to post this... plausibly even, for those 4 weeks, there could indeed be a non-autos football conferences Red Zone clone on a given network for, say, a 7-hour window. And it would be successful because, again, people especially are drawn to watch games where the results have very black-and-white consequences.

While this is, of course, all a thought experiment (... but then, many if not most threads on a fan forum are inherently that... ), it is also true that there is some real-world precedent...

(see Big East/MWC/CUSA story at this link from another thread: https://csnbbs.com/thread-931002-post-17...id17691367 )

...for giving some critical thought to some large-scale cooperative arrangement among non-auto schools/conferences.

And while the previous thread (linked in the OP)--that model being more conservative in its design--is probably more "real world," I've increasingly become persuaded that this model allows for optimal desired outcomes.

Still, a couple of objections have been raised (not here, but elsewhere) that seemed reasonable to consider, so consider them I have...

1. That this model would effectively prescribe either 2 home games or 3 home games out of five for those schools playing in 6-team divisions from year to year. And for a number of those teams in a given season, their 6th game (cross-division with the school in the same ranking, ie 1 v 1, 2 v 2, etc) would represent a 4th conference away game, compared to just 2 at home. (Ostensibly, home field for that 6th game gets rotated from division to division annually, so that would definitely happen.)

2. That this model is absolutely wonderful. But, only for so long as you have 57 teams. Exactly 57. It gets complicated otherwise. So, what happens when Memphis and Boise accept bids to an auto conference? Maybe it never happens, but the question is valid to ask, what if it does? Same situation, other end of the field... what happens if a school or two decide they want to go back to FCS?

Answers...

1. Let's start with the premise that a benefit of the 7+6+6 configuration is that it preserves for athletic directors the latitude to schedule 4 games every season according to their own preferences/priorities. That's worth preserving, imo. So, looking to restructure the configuration is not the way to go in resolving this valid objection.

But here's the solution. You allow ADs to schedule among those 4 games an additional in-conference game or games. And that/those would count in the won-loss standings.

2. I've been asked, "Why don't you go ahead and include the non-auto independents?"

This is one good reason why. If you lose some off the top or off the bottom, it's less of an actual problem, then, to regain what was lost and to maintain 57. Between the indys, and perhaps some upper crust FCS, should be easy to keep 57 solid.

So, exploring this article...

https://www.extrapointsmb.com/mid-major-...streaming/

...this seemed particularly notable:

Quote:The conventional wisdom used to be that college football programs located in urban areas were more valuable to broadcast partners. That's less true now, according to Deninger, who told me that these days, it doesn't matter nearly as much where fans are located, so long as they actually tune in and remain engaged. After all, FCS and G5 leagues don't have conference TV networks that appear on basic cable packages, like the Big Ten or SEC. There's no inherent bonus to being located near say, Dallas, if you don't have any fans.

Location may still be important, just in other ways. Girard pointed out that selling some ads and sponsorship packages can be easier for leagues in a more concentrated geographic footprint than with a conference that is more spread out. The MAC, for example, is almost exclusively in the Midwest, so potential sponsors and partners know exactly what they're getting. A league with spread out over a massive footprint, like say, the old WAC, might have a harder "story" to tell partners, especially since their audience wouldn't be massive in each market. The NFL is a national brand and can sell nationally. Your favorite mid-major college conference isn't.

If you noticed, a premise of the design of this structure (see OP) is relatively tight divisional footprints.

Ostensibly, because all 57 schools are in a cooperative (football-only) league, the three conferences serve mainly a competitive function, just as it is for all 32 NFL franchises though having two conferences. Each conference spans much of the country, providing some marketing implications in the same way that Fox having primarily NFC games and CBS having primarily AFC games does. But importantly to the quote above--ie, where it concerns any given regional advertiser--there is the built-in capacity to concentrate their efforts/dollars on a specific footprint... or... all of those in the East... or Central... or West... or whatever hopscotch pattern makes sense.

Arguably, the best overall opportunity would lie with NBC/Universal/Comcast and NBC affiliates, by virtue of the fact they only have the one contract with Notre Dame (which, by the way, ends in 2025).

So, you have all those NBC affiliates across the country that potentially would welcome some Saturday afternoon regional college football content in addition to whatever Notre Dame home games they get.

Conceptually, there are four platforms from which games may be carried: (a) local NBC affiliates' broadcast, (b) USA Network (which Comcast views as effectively replacing NBCSN in its lineup), © Peacock (streaming), and (d) of course, NBC network.




Weeks 0-4
Regular first four weeks, and for that matter "week zero" as it's called, by nature would be a grab bag, since some auto schools' contracts for their home games would prescribe some games to be played on ESPN, Fox or CBS. In other cases, the broadcast affiliates, the cable channel or the major network might be applicable, while Peacock would make streaming available.

Weeks 5-10
Relatively common division games spanning Weeks 5-10 would be mainly carried by affiliates and streamed via Peacock.


...then, we get to the steak part of the feast...



Week 11
In Week 11, you could see the three conferences' #1 vs. #1 division games, in addition to the affiliates' broadcast, put on nationwide USA Network cable, and promoted heavily as Qualifier Saturday, since the three winners qualify for their conferences' championship (Wk 15).

Weeks 12-14
Then, during Weeks 12-14, there are 3 #1 vs. #1 games each of those weeks as well (3 cross-conference Easts, 3 Centrals, 3 Wests), all of which would receive similar treatment.

Weeks 13-15
Once all current contracts end (2028), the three military academy games over Weeks 13-15 (Army/Navy traditionally is always played Wk 15) potentially also could figure into the mix for NBC, and could be promoted as a package to be seen on the major network.

Week 15 for NBC could feature Army/Navy and all three conference championship games, each of which potentially having strong implications to which non-auto teams are in the final consideration for the NY6 bowl, or at some point, perhaps a newly expanded playoffs.



Between local affiliates, USA Network, Peacock and NBC network, that would seem to blanket the field pretty effectively, and raise the tide for all ships in terms of exposure. And exposure combined with a wide talent inventory pyramid provides impetus for a perpetually shrinking gap between non-autos and autos.