(03-07-2024 09:44 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 09:39 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 08:52 AM)ETSUfan#2 Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 08:22 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 01:04 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The supposed breakoff isn't going to be the utopia that message boards think it will be. The height of college football and college sports in general was 2005-2014. When there was a lot of parity every conference had someone putting up their fist saying they were the best.

This whole P2 concept is just boring and will kill the sport because it's just going to result in OSU/Michigan/USC vs Alabama/Georgia/LSU/Texas every season.

I don’t know many people who see it as a “utopia”. As I’ve stated elsewhere, I believe that there is more talent out there that’s good enough (even if it’s not national title-level talent) to fill more than 34-48 teams and, as long as that’s the case, the market will naturally push back against an arbitrary cutoff of *access*. If a P2 breakaway consists of not playing anyone else in college football (or even worse, basketball and other sports), then that likely backfires. There is too much talent and too many regions of the country that would be cut off from the top level and that would be a “pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered” situation for the P2. If a P2 breakaway is more like the Premier League breakaway from the English soccer system where they have more money and control but there are still games between the Premier League and lower levels (such as the FA Cup), then that’s a little different.

If you look at the proposed CFP revenue distribution system, the Big Ten and SEC would collect 50-60%, the Big 12, ACC and ND would get 30-40%, and the G5 would collectively get 6-10%. That’s a fairly good proxy of the market power of those leagues. Essentially, a P2-only breakway takes 50-60% of the value of the system. That’s by far the largest share and it’s highly concentrated in those two leagues, but it’s definitely leaving a lot of value out. The P4 collectively, though, takes 90-94% of the system. That stands to reason that the P4 separating really would take virtually all of the value in college football (and by extension, all of college sports).

So, from an economic perspective, I still think you need at least the P4 (or a similar number of teams that are in the P4 today regardless of how many conferences are there) to be involved in a breakaway to truly cover the amount of talent available and all of the regions of material value in the country.

That being said, I think a lot of people here underestimate just how much more important and powerful the casual fans are to the TV networks compared to the rabid fans like us. The TV networks (or streamers or whoever ends up showing games in the future) care about the 10 million viewer-plus games and those inherently consist of the vast majority of the people watching not being fans of either team involved at all.

I still think how the English soccer system developed (and arguably the overall European soccer system), where there is a financial and control separation but not necessarily an outright separation of competing against each other, is much more applicable to college sports than how the NFL and other US pro sports leagues work. The amalgamation of different leagues (some of which have specific brands with outsized power and fan bases) with different levels of power in different regions with different interests that are overseen by a weak/ineffective/corrupt central governing authority is something that European soccer and US college sports very much have in common. I don’t think I’m alone as Greg Sankey himself said he read “The Club” about the formation of the Premier League a couple of years ago, which I highly recommend to everyone here.

If ETSU, an FCS football school, never plays a FBS level school again, it really wouldn't bother me that much, though I wouldn't mind the occasional rivals matchup with Appalachian State now and again. Or playing Vanderbilt occasionally to go 1-0 in SEC play again. As as FCS level school, East Tennessee State just has different priorities then FBS schools, be it those in power conferences, or even the G5 conferences.

Now if a split happens that involves other sports, especially basketball, personally I'd consider that justification to finally pull the trigger and cancel my cable. March Madness attracts a lot more casual fans then football does, or it seems like it at times when everyone at work has brackets filled out, not something that really happens in football.

The power schools still have an edge in basketball, but it's much easier for smaller schools to find 5 decent players for the basketball court then 12 players for the gridiron. There's also a lot of schools that have decent basketball teams that have no football of any kind

Doesn't CBS own the contract for the NCAAT? Shouldn't you have said that you were gonna unplug your antenna?

Way more of the tournament games air on TruTV, TBS, TNT, etc at this point than CBS.

Yeah. I know the traditional channels like ESPN , CBS, ABC, etc show March Madness games, but for the first week, when its still 64 and then 32 teams, between both the mens and womens tournaments, there are games on tv channels that otherwise rarely if ever even show commercials for sports events.

Going into the Sweet Sixteen and beyond as the field narrows, the number of networks showing games also drops off. But for the first week of March Madness if they limited it to a single network +/- affiliates, they'd either have to drag it out longer to show every game, or end up not being able to show a good number of the games.

They can't drag things too long or you could have some teams waiting several days to find out who they play next while other teams might not get a break between rounds.

If they went with the option of simply not showing every game, that would probably see too many people getting caught off guard by some of the latter matchups, and as sure as they prioritize who to cover and who not to, they'll miss out on airing potential bracket busting upsets or cinderella runs.

That and going into the off season, for some of the bigger schools every year that have a coach that quits or gets fired or occasionally ouright retires, Not keeping up with the mid major teams can cut off an Athletic Director's ability to see if there are any worthy up and coming coaches out there to an extent.

(03-07-2024 09:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 09:08 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  If the media, collectively, adopt the use of "P2" and "M2," it could be odd to read/hear Clemson and Florida State football referred to as "M2 programs."

Those two programs are power-level in every respect. But with a P2 and M2 structure (if that descriptor takes hold) FSU and Clemson football might be unfairly characterized as "not fully power" (much like we see with some basketball programs that are not part of the P4/Big East and are, as such, referred to as "mid-major").

The P2 and M2 hierarchy could yield the latest example of how some folks characterize the quality of a football and/or basketball program based strongly (or solely) on its league affiliation and not its individual strengths.

That was as much a reason for OUT to the SEC as anything else.

We may take the playoff snub of an undefeated ACC champion as an early manifestation of exactly this.

(03-09-2024 04:28 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 09:26 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-07-2024 09:08 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  If the media, collectively, adopt the use of "P2" and "M2," it could be odd to read/hear Clemson and Florida State football referred to as "M2 programs."

Those two programs are power-level in every respect. But with a P2 and M2 structure (if that descriptor takes hold) FSU and Clemson football might be unfairly characterized as "not fully power" (much like we see with some basketball programs that are not part of the P4/Big East and are, as such, referred to as "mid-major").

The P2 and M2 hierarchy could yield the latest example of how some folks characterize the quality of a football and/or basketball program based strongly (or solely) on its league affiliation and not its individual strengths.

That was as much a reason for OUT to the SEC as anything else.

We may take the playoff snub of an undefeated ACC champion as an early manifestation of exactly this.

lol I appreciate the altruistic alternative viewpoints but it was all