(08-08-2023 09:14 AM)ken d Wrote: I'm disappointed. This past weekend I was putting the finishing touches on a proposal for a P1 conference consisting of all of what was the P5 plus one addition - San Diego State - which I was going to call Pangea (thinking that was original). Now I find out that someone beat me to that conference name a dozen years ago, though with a very different idea about how it would be structured.
My proposal is a single 70 team conference consisting of 10 divisions of 7 schools. Each division would be headed by a school ranked in the Top Ten in average Sagarin rating over the past 10 years, and would have at least one other school ranked in the Top 25. Teams would play everyone in their division alternating home and away. They would also play four other teams (2 home, 2 away) for a 10 game conference schedule. Every school could protect up to four games by mutual consent of their desired opponents, so all rivalries can be preserved. The conference would select opponents for all unprotected games.
Pangea would have a single media contract for regular season games, using all interested media partners. The revenues from this contract, after deducting an amount to finance the administrative budget of the conference, would be shared equally among all 70 schools. There would be a separate contract for the league championship tournament.
In this tournament, revenues would not be shared equally. Teams that participate would be paid off the top, with teams that advance getting paid in increasing amounts for each round they play in. The first round would be played on the home fields of the 8 highest ranked division champs. Visiting teams would be generously reimbursed for their travel expenses. The 3 subsequent rounds would be played at neutral sites, with both teams getting travel reimbursement. After deducting all expenses for conducting the tournament, including payments to participants, net revenues would then be shared equally.
It's a fun exercise. I love to play around with "pick up sticks" ideas too. Just start over and imagine the possibilities...
But a better exercise is trying to use the rules that are already in place and imagine the "power players" (i.e. the conference presidents) using their traditional rules INSIDE the changing landscape.
To me, it's apparent that they'll be 3 not 4 super conferences--2 primary ones and 1 "best of the rest" league. But the best of the rest league is still plenty strong and covers enough geographical corners to be successful AND necessary.
Cutting the state of Arizona, for example, or Utah, OUT of a college football "Pangea" doesn't add to the sport's popularity. (Yes, I know that Wyoming and New Mexico have NEVER had a main stake in the game, but their population also isn't a main factor in the national TV/market game.)
The ACC is going to fold sooner or later. Why the ACC and not the Big 12? Because there are markets there that the SEC and Big Ten don't quite have domination over but do indeed want. If Swofford hadn't forced them into that pitiful deal in 2012, it might have survived. But alas...we're essentially looking at the Carolinas and Virginia that aren't covered by the Big Ten/SEC map.
Once the "Magnificent 7" get absorbed into the Big Ten and SEC (however it slices...those additions will put both of those leagues to near 24 teams each)...you'll be left with 7 teams to head for the Big 12.
And we'll be left with 3 conferences of 24 teams each.
72...and Notre Dame
