This from another message board poster--some will agree with its message and others will not. Wonder how the presidents of most of the Gang of 5 schools would think about its message? Still worth the entire read whether you agree with it or not.
________________________________________
________________________________________

"I believe in the end result common sense will prevail. Fans like Cougar King are reacting as one would have in the past, when the rules of the game were different. Now we're all in the same boat, same BCS bowl access, similar TV money and needing a place for our programs to build and grow.

Here's the reality for Cougar King and UofH fans, you're fixing to break ground on a $140 million dollar stadium. The Big East was supposed to be bringing you $8-10 Million in revenue...now with the defections you'll get 2-3 if you are lucky. Are these Big East leftovers going to fill your shiny new stadium? And if you stay in the Big East you know that UConn and Cincy have one foot out the door. What happens then? Backfill with C-USA teams and start the cycle of unrest all over again because the eastern schools want school A and the western schools want school B? It's dumb...it makes no sense.

The Mountain West is the old WAC - ask SMU and Tulsa how that worked out for them. Late night games, long travel for student athletes...the revenue is the same, the BCS bowl access is the same.. it makes sense for schools in that region which is why Boise returned. And here's the reality, if you think Wyoming, CSU and some of the other Mountain West schools want another Texas school in the mix after their TCU experience you better think again. They know any Texas school will have an immediate recruiting advantage. And I refuse to believe that Wyoming and Utah State fans will flock to see games at Ford stadium or the new Houston one. Their fans and students aren't going to travel to those games and vice versa and you know it.

If NIU proved anything by getting to the BCS it is that what the MAC does promoting stability and regional rivalries makes the most sense. What's the advantage of having the best of the rest if the money and bowl access is the same? Why should you pull a La. Tech and prevent your seniors from a bowl game they earned because you are afraid of getting beat by a neighborhood program? It doesn't make sense!!

Boise made a reasonable decision by returning to the Mountain West. SDSU will follow shortly. Common sense will eventually prevail.

First off you have to limit the amount of move ups by setting clear standards or requirements for participating in FBS. That needs to happen quickly or it will force the big boys to try and break off on their own. 10 fingers and 10 toes should not be the FBS requirement any longer. Set some standards.

Take the gang of five schools and pull out a map. The Mountain West and the MAC are already pretty well set. Take the Big East, C-USA and Belt and cut it into regional sections that make sense. Where fans can jump into a car and get to games, where rivalries can develop and grow. If you have invested more in your program than others who you are joining it will come out in the wash because you will have more successful programs and have a better shot at the BCS windfall game, NCAA tourney bids etc. Put together a mini playoff among the regions and sell it to the highest bidder. Work out a deal with the NCAA where the winner gets the BCS spot... why not think outside of the box?

I understand Houston and SMU don't want to have to tell their fanbase they had to "Go Back" to C-USA -- Fine then, rename the damn thing. Call it the XYZ conference or Acme... give it a DBA...that way all the NCAA bids and units can stay in tact.

So many are so concerned about who they are aligning themselves with....here's a big secret, Boise moved back to the Mountain West in part because they expect to DOMINATE that conference every single year which means they have a good shot at a BCS bowl every single year which mean big dollars for their program and good recruiting. Their fanbase will get to attend a LOT of games and have A LOT of fun. In the new world order you should align yourself with teams that you feel you can compete against and win more times than not. Teams that are close enough for your fans to drive to so you can build interest and attendance and increase revenue.

Come to agreement on teams, regions and names and then, here's a novel idea -- work together!! Instead of fighting amongst yourselves, use your power in numbers to influence the NCAA by creating more BCS access (bigger playoff) and make a better road for the future."

Only flaw I see in Houston and SMU going to the MWC over back to CUSA or stay in BE is that the MWC is "Boise's conference. They will still have less bowl bids and less tv exposure than CUSA OR the BE. I don't think the MWC can sell that SOS that this "playoff" claims will be a factor either.

And with the current collection of schools nearly all of the BE they are moving too are teams they have been playing.

Pride, egos and ADs unwilling to admit they made a mistake have a good chance of screwing this up some more.

Let's hope common sense prevails.

And the obsession with the BE continues.

Nice sentiment and all, but your potshot at La Tech was unwarranted and untrue.

(01-03-2013 08:45 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  And the obsession with the BE continues.

Your obsession with our obsession gives it meaning.

Thank you for that.

(01-03-2013 08:52 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  

(01-03-2013 08:45 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  And the obsession with the BE continues.

Your obsession with our obsession gives it meaning.

Thank you for that.

+1 LoL

(01-03-2013 08:48 PM)BuzDawg73 Wrote:  Nice sentiment and all, but your potshot at La Tech was unwarranted and untrue.

So there is no ambiguity, that entire (and excellently written) manifesto and subsequent remark about La Tech were not penned by me at all. If I had
written it, it would have been much, much shorter. }:>)

Addendum: Seriously, I wish the Dawgs would have played in a bowl game and still not totally clear as to why yall didn't. I now pull for all CUSA-to-be programs because we are all literally in this together now. In fact, I wish yall or U of L could have played FSU in the Orange Bowl because either one of your teams would have given the Seminoles a good game. Had NIU gotten a few breaks it would have been a closer game but they are the ones who got to a BCS bowl, now aren't they?

GMG!

(01-03-2013 07:09 PM)WeatherfordMeanGreen Wrote:  This from another message board poster--some will agree with its message and others will not. Wonder how the presidents of most of the Gang of 5 schools would think about its message? Still worth the entire read whether you agree with it or not.
________________________________________
________________________________________

"I believe in the end result common sense will prevail. Fans like Cougar King are reacting as one would have in the past, when the rules of the game were different. Now we're all in the same boat, same BCS bowl access, similar TV money and needing a place for our programs to build and grow.

Here's the reality for Cougar King and UofH fans, you're fixing to break ground on a $140 million dollar stadium. The Big East was supposed to be bringing you $8-10 Million in revenue...now with the defections you'll get 2-3 if you are lucky. Are these Big East leftovers going to fill your shiny new stadium? And if you stay in the Big East you know that UConn and Cincy have one foot out the door. What happens then? Backfill with C-USA teams and start the cycle of unrest all over again because the eastern schools want school A and the western schools want school B? It's dumb...it makes no sense.

The Mountain West is the old WAC - ask SMU and Tulsa how that worked out for them. Late night games, long travel for student athletes...the revenue is the same, the BCS bowl access is the same.. it makes sense for schools in that region which is why Boise returned. And here's the reality, if you think Wyoming, CSU and some of the other Mountain West schools want another Texas school in the mix after their TCU experience you better think again. They know any Texas school will have an immediate recruiting advantage. And I refuse to believe that Wyoming and Utah State fans will flock to see games at Ford stadium or the new Houston one. Their fans and students aren't going to travel to those games and vice versa and you know it.

If NIU proved anything by getting to the BCS it is that what the MAC does promoting stability and regional rivalries makes the most sense. What's the advantage of having the best of the rest if the money and bowl access is the same? Why should you pull a La. Tech and prevent your seniors from a bowl game they earned because you are afraid of getting beat by a neighborhood program? It doesn't make sense!!

Boise made a reasonable decision by returning to the Mountain West. SDSU will follow shortly. Common sense will eventually prevail.

First off you have to limit the amount of move ups by setting clear standards or requirements for participating in FBS. That needs to happen quickly or it will force the big boys to try and break off on their own. 10 fingers and 10 toes should not be the FBS requirement any longer. Set some standards.

Take the gang of five schools and pull out a map. The Mountain West and the MAC are already pretty well set. Take the Big East, C-USA and Belt and cut it into regional sections that make sense. Where fans can jump into a car and get to games, where rivalries can develop and grow. If you have invested more in your program than others who you are joining it will come out in the wash because you will have more successful programs and have a better shot at the BCS windfall game, NCAA tourney bids etc. Put together a mini playoff among the regions and sell it to the highest bidder. Work out a deal with the NCAA where the winner gets the BCS spot... why not think outside of the box?

I understand Houston and SMU don't want to have to tell their fanbase they had to "Go Back" to C-USA -- Fine then, rename the damn thing. Call it the XYZ conference or Acme... give it a DBA...that way all the NCAA bids and units can stay in tact.

So many are so concerned about who they are aligning themselves with....here's a big secret, Boise moved back to the Mountain West in part because they expect to DOMINATE that conference every single year which means they have a good shot at a BCS bowl every single year which mean big dollars for their program and good recruiting. Their fanbase will get to attend a LOT of games and have A LOT of fun. In the new world order you should align yourself with teams that you feel you can compete against and win more times than not. Teams that are close enough for your fans to drive to so you can build interest and attendance and increase revenue.

Come to agreement on teams, regions and names and then, here's a novel idea -- work together!! Instead of fighting amongst yourselves, use your power in numbers to influence the NCAA by creating more BCS access (bigger playoff) and make a better road for the future.":cheers:

Nice. How about Reforming the SWC? Do what the MWC and MAC have done and make it a regional conference. None of these conferences will be AQ conferences, not even the nBE, so why be in a conference with teams clear across the country with lower conference revenue, lower attendance because fans can't attend away games from far distances, higher travel costs, and no true built-up rivalries. Follow the Boise State model and return to former members and attempt to dominate your conference. The only difference is the MWC is already a regional conference and doesn't need to be split.

Assuming UTEP returns to the MWC for a more regional fit in the right time zone for them, look at the quality of schools at or along I 10 and I 20:

I 10 - UTSA, Texas State, Houston, Rice, Louisiana, Tulane, USM, Troy
I 20 - SMU, N. Texas, Tulsa, LA Tech, UAB, Ark State, Middle Tennessee, WKU

This is as good a conference as the MWC and MAC, Boise State being the exception.

Memphis is a swing team for either conference. I put them with UConn and Temple for basketball.

Let the East Coast teams form a regional conference as well:

ECU, Marshall, Temple, USF, UCF, Memphis, UConn, Cincinnati, UMass, FIU, FAU, GA State, Old Dominion, and Charlotte. If the ACC gets raided and fills in with some of these teams, there are good FCS schools that want to move up and can be added like App State & GA Southern.

(01-03-2013 07:09 PM)WeatherfordMeanGreen Wrote:  This from another message board poster--some will agree with its message and others will not. Wonder how the presidents of most of the Gang of 5 schools would think about its message? Still worth the entire read whether you agree with it or not.
________________________________________
________________________________________

"I believe in the end result common sense will prevail. Fans like Cougar King are reacting as one would have in the past, when the rules of the game were different. Now we're all in the same boat, same BCS bowl access, similar TV money and needing a place for our programs to build and grow.

Here's the reality for Cougar King and UofH fans, you're fixing to break ground on a $140 million dollar stadium. The Big East was supposed to be bringing you $8-10 Million in revenue...now with the defections you'll get 2-3 if you are lucky. Are these Big East leftovers going to fill your shiny new stadium? And if you stay in the Big East you know that UConn and Cincy have one foot out the door. What happens then? Backfill with C-USA teams and start the cycle of unrest all over again because the eastern schools want school A and the western schools want school B? It's dumb...it makes no sense.

The Mountain West is the old WAC - ask SMU and Tulsa how that worked out for them. Late night games, long travel for student athletes...the revenue is the same, the BCS bowl access is the same.. it makes sense for schools in that region which is why Boise returned. And here's the reality, if you think Wyoming, CSU and some of the other Mountain West schools want another Texas school in the mix after their TCU experience you better think again. They know any Texas school will have an immediate recruiting advantage. And I refuse to believe that Wyoming and Utah State fans will flock to see games at Ford stadium or the new Houston one. Their fans and students aren't going to travel to those games and vice versa and you know it.

If NIU proved anything by getting to the BCS it is that what the MAC does promoting stability and regional rivalries makes the most sense. What's the advantage of having the best of the rest if the money and bowl access is the same? Why should you pull a La. Tech and prevent your seniors from a bowl game they earned because you are afraid of getting beat by a neighborhood program? It doesn't make sense!!

Boise made a reasonable decision by returning to the Mountain West. SDSU will follow shortly. Common sense will eventually prevail.

First off you have to limit the amount of move ups by setting clear standards or requirements for participating in FBS. That needs to happen quickly or it will force the big boys to try and break off on their own. 10 fingers and 10 toes should not be the FBS requirement any longer. Set some standards.

Take the gang of five schools and pull out a map. The Mountain West and the MAC are already pretty well set. Take the Big East, C-USA and Belt and cut it into regional sections that make sense. Where fans can jump into a car and get to games, where rivalries can develop and grow. If you have invested more in your program than others who you are joining it will come out in the wash because you will have more successful programs and have a better shot at the BCS windfall game, NCAA tourney bids etc. Put together a mini playoff among the regions and sell it to the highest bidder. Work out a deal with the NCAA where the winner gets the BCS spot... why not think outside of the box?

I understand Houston and SMU don't want to have to tell their fanbase they had to "Go Back" to C-USA -- Fine then, rename the damn thing. Call it the XYZ conference or Acme... give it a DBA...that way all the NCAA bids and units can stay in tact.

So many are so concerned about who they are aligning themselves with....here's a big secret, Boise moved back to the Mountain West in part because they expect to DOMINATE that conference every single year which means they have a good shot at a BCS bowl every single year which mean big dollars for their program and good recruiting. Their fanbase will get to attend a LOT of games and have A LOT of fun. In the new world order you should align yourself with teams that you feel you can compete against and win more times than not. Teams that are close enough for your fans to drive to so you can build interest and attendance and increase revenue.

Come to agreement on teams, regions and names and then, here's a novel idea -- work together!! Instead of fighting amongst yourselves, use your power in numbers to influence the NCAA by creating more BCS access (bigger playoff) and make a better road for the future."

I like it. UNT was unhappy with the Belt because they were on an island and did not have any Texas rivals so the CUSA invite was great for them. UTEP wants to continue to play games in Dallas and Houston for their alumni bases. Texas State sold a move up to their fanbase by promising to play Houston, SMU, Rice. UTSA supposedly had their choice between MWC,CUSA, and SBC and chose CUSA because of the access to Texas rivals.

We all want the same thing, but ego continues to get in the way.

(01-03-2013 09:37 PM)HoustonCajun Wrote:  

...

Nice. How about Reforming the SWC? Do what the MWC and MAC have done and make it a regional conference. None of these conferences will be AQ conferences, not even the nBE, so why be in a conference with teams clear across the country with lower conference revenue, lower attendance because fans can't attend away games from far distances, higher travel costs, and no true built-up rivalries. Follow the Boise State model and return to former members and attempt to dominate your conference. The only difference is the MWC is already a regional conference and doesn't need to be split.

Assuming UTEP returns to the MWC for a more regional fit in the right time zone for them, look at the quality of schools at or along I 10 and I 20:

I 10 - UTSA, Texas State, Houston, Rice, Louisiana, Tulane, USM, Troy
I 20 - SMU, N. Texas, Tulsa, LA Tech, UAB, Ark State, Middle Tennessee, WKU

This is as good a conference as the MWC and MAC, Boise State being the exception.

Memphis is a swing team for either conference. I put them with UConn and Temple for basketball.

Let the East Coast teams form a regional conference as well:

ECU, Marshall, Temple, USF, UCF, Memphis, UConn, Cincinnati, UMass, FIU, FAU, GA State, Old Dominion, and Charlotte. If the ACC gets raided and fills in with some of these teams, there are good FCS schools that want to move up and can be added like App State & GA Southern.

I like this.

(01-03-2013 07:09 PM)WeatherfordMeanGreen Wrote:  First off you have to limit the amount of move ups by setting clear standards or requirements for participating in FBS. That needs to happen quickly or it will force the big boys to try and break off on their own. 10 fingers and 10 toes should not be the FBS requirement any longer. Set some standards.

I think this is a great post and the absolute key is the comment above. The Group of 5 needs to band together and prevent anymore FCS teams from moving up. FBS is already at saturation from a $$ standpoint.

(01-03-2013 09:37 PM)HoustonCajun Wrote:  

(01-03-2013 07:09 PM)WeatherfordMeanGreen Wrote:  This from another message board poster--some will agree with its message and others will not. Wonder how the presidents of most of the Gang of 5 schools would think about its message? Still worth the entire read whether you agree with it or not.
________________________________________
________________________________________

"I believe in the end result common sense will prevail. Fans like Cougar King are reacting as one would have in the past, when the rules of the game were different. Now we're all in the same boat, same BCS bowl access, similar TV money and needing a place for our programs to build and grow.

Here's the reality for Cougar King and UofH fans, you're fixing to break ground on a $140 million dollar stadium. The Big East was supposed to be bringing you $8-10 Million in revenue...now with the defections you'll get 2-3 if you are lucky. Are these Big East leftovers going to fill your shiny new stadium? And if you stay in the Big East you know that UConn and Cincy have one foot out the door. What happens then? Backfill with C-USA teams and start the cycle of unrest all over again because the eastern schools want school A and the western schools want school B? It's dumb...it makes no sense.

The Mountain West is the old WAC - ask SMU and Tulsa how that worked out for them. Late night games, long travel for student athletes...the revenue is the same, the BCS bowl access is the same.. it makes sense for schools in that region which is why Boise returned. And here's the reality, if you think Wyoming, CSU and some of the other Mountain West schools want another Texas school in the mix after their TCU experience you better think again. They know any Texas school will have an immediate recruiting advantage. And I refuse to believe that Wyoming and Utah State fans will flock to see games at Ford stadium or the new Houston one. Their fans and students aren't going to travel to those games and vice versa and you know it.

If NIU proved anything by getting to the BCS it is that what the MAC does promoting stability and regional rivalries makes the most sense. What's the advantage of having the best of the rest if the money and bowl access is the same? Why should you pull a La. Tech and prevent your seniors from a bowl game they earned because you are afraid of getting beat by a neighborhood program? It doesn't make sense!!

Boise made a reasonable decision by returning to the Mountain West. SDSU will follow shortly. Common sense will eventually prevail.

First off you have to limit the amount of move ups by setting clear standards or requirements for participating in FBS. That needs to happen quickly or it will force the big boys to try and break off on their own. 10 fingers and 10 toes should not be the FBS requirement any longer. Set some standards.

Take the gang of five schools and pull out a map. The Mountain West and the MAC are already pretty well set. Take the Big East, C-USA and Belt and cut it into regional sections that make sense. Where fans can jump into a car and get to games, where rivalries can develop and grow. If you have invested more in your program than others who you are joining it will come out in the wash because you will have more successful programs and have a better shot at the BCS windfall game, NCAA tourney bids etc. Put together a mini playoff among the regions and sell it to the highest bidder. Work out a deal with the NCAA where the winner gets the BCS spot... why not think outside of the box?

I understand Houston and SMU don't want to have to tell their fanbase they had to "Go Back" to C-USA -- Fine then, rename the damn thing. Call it the XYZ conference or Acme... give it a DBA...that way all the NCAA bids and units can stay in tact.

So many are so concerned about who they are aligning themselves with....here's a big secret, Boise moved back to the Mountain West in part because they expect to DOMINATE that conference every single year which means they have a good shot at a BCS bowl every single year which mean big dollars for their program and good recruiting. Their fanbase will get to attend a LOT of games and have A LOT of fun. In the new world order you should align yourself with teams that you feel you can compete against and win more times than not. Teams that are close enough for your fans to drive to so you can build interest and attendance and increase revenue.

Come to agreement on teams, regions and names and then, here's a novel idea -- work together!! Instead of fighting amongst yourselves, use your power in numbers to influence the NCAA by creating more BCS access (bigger playoff) and make a better road for the future.":cheers:

Nice. How about Reforming the SWC? Do what the MWC and MAC have done and make it a regional conference. None of these conferences will be AQ conferences, not even the nBE, so why be in a conference with teams clear across the country with lower conference revenue, lower attendance because fans can't attend away games from far distances, higher travel costs, and no true built-up rivalries. Follow the Boise State model and return to former members and attempt to dominate your conference. The only difference is the MWC is already a regional conference and doesn't need to be split.

Assuming UTEP returns to the MWC for a more regional fit in the right time zone for them, look at the quality of schools at or along I 10 and I 20:

I 10 -UTEP, UTSA, Texas State, Houston, Rice, Louisiana, USM, South Alabama
I 20 - SMU, N. Texas, Tulsa, LA Tech, UAB, Ark State, Middle Tennessee, WKU

This is as good a conference as the MWC and MAC, Boise State being the exception.

Memphis is a swing team for either conference. I put them with UConn and Temple for basketball.

Let the East Coast teams form a regional conference as well:

ECU, Marshall, Temple, USF, UCF, Memphis, UConn, Cincinnati, UMass, FIU, FAU, GA State, Old Dominion, and Charlotte. If the ACC gets raided and fills in with some of these teams, there are good FCS schools that want to move up and can be added like App State & GA Southern.

FIY[/b]

(01-03-2013 10:02 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(01-03-2013 07:09 PM)WeatherfordMeanGreen Wrote:  First off you have to limit the amount of move ups by setting clear standards or requirements for participating in FBS. That needs to happen quickly or it will force the big boys to try and break off on their own. 10 fingers and 10 toes should not be the FBS requirement any longer. Set some standards.

I think this is a great post and the absolute key is the comment above. The Group of 5 needs to band together and prevent anymore FCS teams from moving up. FBS is already at saturation from a $$ standpoint.

Once again, I did not write that superb post. Wish I had, but I didn't. I do know that the spouse of the one who did write it is an SMU Law School grad and now a successful attorney last word I got.

I posted similar on realignment thread. I think you could overcome some of the hangups about being in the same conference as another team by putting teams in separate divisions for football and then reap the benfits of local competition for OLY sports.

I simply have no interest in the eastern teams. They do not have a national profile and while some have very nice programs, I would not want to play them on a regular basis. And i'm sure their fans don't have an interest in playing us. I get that.

One part I like about the MWC deal is the idea that the teams that make a bowl get to keep half (or some percentage greater than 1/12 or whatever) the money for themselves and the conference splits the rest.

(01-03-2013 10:02 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  I think this is a great post and the absolute key is the comment above. The Group of 5 needs to band together and prevent anymore FCS teams from moving up. FBS is already at saturation from a $$ standpoint.

Ive been saying since 2003 when realignment first started that the NCAA needed to look a strict guidelines on schools moving up. Not only facility wise but also support wise. At this point I think only 2 teams could actually move up. That would be Appy and Montana.

We all need a savior type person who speaks the gospel of common sense for athletics, and inspires school presidents to see the benefits. This would be one hell of a salesman. Is there such a person who can gain the ear of presidents from across the country? It is awfully hard to overcome greed and perceived superiority among schools.

But it's not going to happen with the "BCS" schools in power. Until the NCAA creates a playoff system LIKE IT HAS IN EVERY OTHER SPORT. And by the way, as well as high school and pro sports have, our universities will position themselves to get in a conference that can get them a fair shot at a national championship.

I understand that the larger schools have more money, but isn't the underdog what makes March madness so fun, when a Gonzaga or a James Madison make a run, or hell even a Houston or Memphis do?

The lack of the NCAA growing balls to reign in the big boys is what is ruining AMATEUR football.

I am a student of the history of the NCAA and its members and study the business of the game.

There have been several periods of turmoil and they happen because inefficiencies are created, either because members of a conference grow apart in focus (quick top of my head examples, the Southland choosing to move Division I which led to Trinity and Abilene leaving and the league entering Louisiana or the collapse of the Border Conference after Texas Tech went SWC and Arizona and Arizona State went to form the WAC) or they happen because the economics of the game change such as the once massive Southern Conference spinning off the SEC and later ACC or South Carolina leaving the ACC because the NCAA TV deal meant they were no worse off in TV access, money or bowl revenue as an independent.

The growing NCAA Tournament and associated revenue led to the Metro, Sun Belt and Big East forming in the latter half of the 70's.

What we have seen since 1991 was actions taken to cash in or at least preserve revenue as the NCAA and then CFA TV deals went away. Then we had the Big East making decisions based on preserving access to the BCS while MWC made moves geared to get a 7th AQ slot.

What we have learned is that there isn't an unlimited pot of TV money despite the belief contracts could only rise.

What has happened is consolidation. In 1981 we had 13 conferences and 28 indepedents sharing the NCAA contract. Five years later the major TV was consolidated into seven conferences and 22 independents. A decade later it was six conferences and one independent. Now it is five conferences and one quasi-independent.

We are in a position where three conferences unquestionably control their own destiny (SEC, Big 10, Pac-12) the Big XII as long as Texas and OU find it in their interest to remain, while ACC value is less concentrated it has depending on whom you believe with in the hands of 4 to 7 institutions.

The MAC has been rather stable because the value they have is geographically remote from those who could take advantage of it, while the MWC seems bound that direction.

The inefficiency is Big East, C-USA, Sun Belt. Three leagues with sweeping footprints that greatly overlap.

There are only two cures to that inefficency.

The first is a sweeping conference that is quasi-elite essentially the Big East as it exists today with two regionalized entry level leagues roughly the members of C-USA and Sun Belt reorganized into two regional leagues one eastern oriented and the other southwestern oriented.

That is the more realistic outcome but the most inefficient because the revenue available is offset by higher travel and reduced rivalry intensity to drive ticket sales and donations.

The economics ought to lead to creation of two strong regionalized leagues one eastern/southeastern oriented and one southwestern and mid-south oriented with a third entry level league that has a large footprint.

The second option is better because it lends itself well to three tier television. Top tier, a national package for exposure that isn't especially strong financially. A second tier that is regionally focused and would have good financial clout because of ability to deliver viewers as opposed to theoritical market value and a third sub-regional package of remaining inventory sold by schools or sub-groups of schools to either regional cable, local broadcast or online. Overhead is minimized and the regionality promotes rivalries, ticket sales, and interest and passion.

The second option provides greater FBS stability. The two regional power leagues aren't entry level so those desiring to test the waters of FBS face low league revenue and very high overhead traveling many hundreds if not a thousand or more miles for conference road games.

The first option is destablizing to FBS as a whole because if the entry level leagues are geographically sensible a move-up faces travel costs not terribly out-of-line with their FCS affiliation. Higher scholarship costs and somewhat higher salaries are the only barrier to entry.

Historic numbers indicate the top level of college football grows instable when membership grows outside the 120-135. We are at 124 today with three more (Georgia State - Sun Belt, ODU - CUSA, and Charlotte - CUSA) slated to join and the Sun Belt liable to add two to four more to secure its future.

What needs to happen is a group of schools in the east or southeast and a group in the south or southwest to basically divy up Big East, fill their ranks from CUSA and Sun Belt and whatever remains becoming the trans-regional entry level league.

(01-03-2013 11:16 PM)tigtoodawg Wrote:  But it's not going to happen with the "BCS" schools in power. Until the NCAA creates a playoff system LIKE IT HAS IN EVERY OTHER SPORT. And by the way, as well as high school and pro sports have, our universities will position themselves to get in a conference that can get them a fair shot at a national championship.

I understand that the larger schools have more money, but isn't the underdog what makes March madness so fun, when a Gonzaga or a James Madison make a run, or hell even a Houston or Memphis do?

The lack of the NCAA growing balls to reign in the big boys is what is ruining AMATEUR football.

An NCAA Tournament style playoff will bring an end to football as we know it.

The current system sends over 90% of revenue to the power five leagues. Their greed has opened the door for the rest of us. In order to get their deal through and sit atop the money pile, they have created the access slot. Whether it has been Boise, Utah, TCU, Hawaii, or NIU the busters have in every case performed better than expected in ticket sales and in each case other than Hawaii and NIU performed better than expected on the field.

In college athletics, serious programs generate 30% to 35% of income from their conference. The remainder is ticket sales, donations, self-sold TV and sponsorships.

Those institutions that have busted gain a great advantage in recruiting and in self-generated income that positions them to be competitive.

If a true NCAA style playoff happens, the revenue division will prompt those schools to seriously consider leaving the NCAA or realigning within the NCAA structure.

Arkansas doesn't want to share revenue with Arkansas State just as LSU does not want to share with La.Tech. But last year Arkansas set new revenue records in ticket sales and donations but at the same time Arkansas State blew up all ticket and donation records as well. Arkansas might not like it, but that revenue growth at Arkansas State didn't come out of their pocket.

When it comes out of their pocket, they will find a way to stop it. That's the inherent risk of a playoff. In basketball most everyone in the power leagues exceeding .500 will go collect part of the wealth, football does not lend itself to that sort of large field.