(05-27-2020 05:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 04:47 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 03:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 03:09 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  One problem with a "breakaway" is leadership. Who will lead it?

The leading college presidents? Please. They have much bigger fish to fry at the moment.

The leading college ADs? Any meeting of the ADs will be crashed by the NCAA leadership.

The P5 commissioners? Maybe. That's a small enough group that they could lead this. But it's really tricky. Any decisions they agree on effectively will have to be ratified by the presidents of the leading schools - because you know darn well that the Presidents of Texas, Ohio State, USC, UNC, etc all view their commissioners as their employee, not their boss.

That makes it a mess. Any objections will have to be settled by 5 powerless commissioners acting as intermediaries for the decision makers. If you've ever negotiated to buy a house, imagine that instead of two parties having two intermediaries, you have 20-30 important parties with 5 intermediaries about topics that might violate labor laws or anti-monopoly laws. Again, the Presidents don't have the time to do this by themselves... they're busy plugging budget gaps of hundreds of millions of dollars and don't want to risk the bad publicity that could come from leading this crusade.

Come on you can do better than that. Who stands to make the most out of this other than the schools? Who drove the OU/UGa suit in the early 80's? It sure as hell wasn't the presidents and ADs. It was strongly encouraged behind the scenes by networks.

Have you guys stopped to consider who Mike Slive, Jim Delany, Warren, Sankey and other such guys really are? Contract lawyers for media rights companies. That's right the foxes were put in charge of the hen houses and the hens paid them!

Was realignment started by presidents and commissioners? No It was started when networks told Kramer and Delany how much more they could make by expanding.

Who is it that would like a better organized and contained football product to be a cheaper alternative to the NFL but one that had great advertising rewards because of the days on which it is played and the diverse audience it reaches? The Networks

And what was it that Howard Beal said when talking to his network executive when the executive explained to him who it was that drove the news and how it was that they made money? The fictional character from the movie Network exclaimed to Ned Beatty's character, "I have heard the voice of God." To which Ned Beatty said, "You probably have!" "It's TV dummy!" The brain trust for organization of a breakaway will be corporate in nature and will involve the commissioners who will show the AD's and College Presidents the sums they will make and the latter will drool and it will be a done deal.

IMO the biggest thing to be worked out would be subcontracted a unified officiating service, paid much better than the NCAA is, which will have its own enforcement wing and each conference will front their share of overhead to make it happen.

Once that is taken care of there isn't much else that need be done except for each athletic department to hire a legal team for the drawing up of contracts instead of grant and aids.

Those who can't wrap their heads around how far down the road this is are typical in their hysterical claims that it can't happen. It's already happening. Quit overthinking things and reacting like the sky if falling. The only thing happening, hopefully, is the death of an outdated, bloated, greedy organization that has 2 endowments of over a billion dollars total, that has no justification for ratholing that money save crisis and when one hit the first thing they did was to back away from using the endowed money to cover the schools that they exist to serve. In the South we say Piss on 'em! It's easier than people think when you have those who are dying to help you monetize and organize it waiting in the wings for an opportunity to do so.

I shake my head a lot at what I read here and categorize as ambient hysteria. It reminds me of an old saying that once adorned the walls of Auburn's School of Agriculture, but was removed when PC set in, "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think!" The word play of course was on horticulture, but the point was uncultured and uneducated leaves us all to be whores of the world. Well substitute slave for whore and you have what the NCAA has done to the athletes and to the schools, but when you think about it whore is still appropriate as well. We've been all working for a Pimp called the NCAA!.

If profit & revenue were the dominant concern (like it was with realignment), you'd be right. The network execs could lead the charge.

But the bolded part is the toughest part to accomplish.

If something's going to change, it has to change in a direction that the Presidents want. Notre Dame & Stanford & Wisconsin & many others won't sign up for a new organization that decreases the players' connection with the academic side of the university (because they think the connection is already too tenuous). It'll be very tough to find a solution that the Presidents, the schools' legal counsel, and the schools' accountants are happy with. So most schools (particularly in the North & West) will stick with the NCAA until a solution presents itself.

And who is most likely to come up with such a solution? Not the media executives, the conference commissioners, or the Presidents. Rather, the solution is likely to come from the organization that has the most to lose from a new system: from the NCAA itself.

The NCAA has too much money to collapse on its own weight. The only thing that will doom the NCAA is if they are so incompetent that the conference commissioners take it upon themselves to find a better solution to the NIL crisis.

What they say today and do tomorrow are two different things. Financial need and need for exposure in a time of nadir for enrollees will change their tunes. Being painted as a plantation owner benefiting from a modern vestige of slavery won't help their PC feelings either.

We've known that this was a possibility but it won't stop the Big 12/ SEC / and ACC from making the move, nor will it stop some key independents.

If folks up North choose their path it will be seen for what it is, a lesser form of the game and they can thump their chests over ethics but it won't help their exposure, their sagging population, or their futures.

Nathan Bedford Forrest once said , "The battle is generally won by the side that gets there firstest with the mostest." Not much has changed in 160 years on that front.

We agree on most of the bolded part. It will definitely be seen as inferior football.

But bad for their future? I doubt it.

Plenty of schools do just fine without big-time athletics. Only 3 of the top-11 universities offer football scholarships. Even among public schools, 11 of the top-40 don't play FBS football: William & Mary, SUNY-Binghamton, SUNY-Stony Brook, CO School of Mines, Delaware, and 6 University of California campuses.

(05-27-2020 05:28 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 05:20 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Here's who is in the P5 who might choose to stay behind or be shown the door:
- Wake Forest
- Duke
- Boston College
- Washington State
- Oregon State
- Stanford
- Northwestern
- Rutgers
- Kansas State
- Baylor

Not a single college President at any of these schools would not choose to continue with the P5. Rutgers has the entire political structure of New Jersey funding it's move to P5, so they are not going anywhere. Duke, Northwestern and Stanford define themselves in P5 and have championships, especially Stanford and Duke; they have massive money and big donors. Those State schools might be relatively poor, but they are not going anywhere either.

It's delusional to think you can shed any schools in P5

Baylor, KSU, Oregon St, Wazzu may be shown the door. They barely qualify as universities at this point. And one especially can be considered as a criminal org at this point.

(05-27-2020 05:41 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 05:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 04:47 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 03:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 03:09 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  One problem with a "breakaway" is leadership. Who will lead it?

The leading college presidents? Please. They have much bigger fish to fry at the moment.

The leading college ADs? Any meeting of the ADs will be crashed by the NCAA leadership.

The P5 commissioners? Maybe. That's a small enough group that they could lead this. But it's really tricky. Any decisions they agree on effectively will have to be ratified by the presidents of the leading schools - because you know darn well that the Presidents of Texas, Ohio State, USC, UNC, etc all view their commissioners as their employee, not their boss.

That makes it a mess. Any objections will have to be settled by 5 powerless commissioners acting as intermediaries for the decision makers. If you've ever negotiated to buy a house, imagine that instead of two parties having two intermediaries, you have 20-30 important parties with 5 intermediaries about topics that might violate labor laws or anti-monopoly laws. Again, the Presidents don't have the time to do this by themselves... they're busy plugging budget gaps of hundreds of millions of dollars and don't want to risk the bad publicity that could come from leading this crusade.

Come on you can do better than that. Who stands to make the most out of this other than the schools? Who drove the OU/UGa suit in the early 80's? It sure as hell wasn't the presidents and ADs. It was strongly encouraged behind the scenes by networks.

Have you guys stopped to consider who Mike Slive, Jim Delany, Warren, Sankey and other such guys really are? Contract lawyers for media rights companies. That's right the foxes were put in charge of the hen houses and the hens paid them!

Was realignment started by presidents and commissioners? No It was started when networks told Kramer and Delany how much more they could make by expanding.

Who is it that would like a better organized and contained football product to be a cheaper alternative to the NFL but one that had great advertising rewards because of the days on which it is played and the diverse audience it reaches? The Networks

And what was it that Howard Beal said when talking to his network executive when the executive explained to him who it was that drove the news and how it was that they made money? The fictional character from the movie Network exclaimed to Ned Beatty's character, "I have heard the voice of God." To which Ned Beatty said, "You probably have!" "It's TV dummy!" The brain trust for organization of a breakaway will be corporate in nature and will involve the commissioners who will show the AD's and College Presidents the sums they will make and the latter will drool and it will be a done deal.

IMO the biggest thing to be worked out would be subcontracted a unified officiating service, paid much better than the NCAA is, which will have its own enforcement wing and each conference will front their share of overhead to make it happen.

Once that is taken care of there isn't much else that need be done except for each athletic department to hire a legal team for the drawing up of contracts instead of grant and aids.

Those who can't wrap their heads around how far down the road this is are typical in their hysterical claims that it can't happen. It's already happening. Quit overthinking things and reacting like the sky if falling. The only thing happening, hopefully, is the death of an outdated, bloated, greedy organization that has 2 endowments of over a billion dollars total, that has no justification for ratholing that money save crisis and when one hit the first thing they did was to back away from using the endowed money to cover the schools that they exist to serve. In the South we say Piss on 'em! It's easier than people think when you have those who are dying to help you monetize and organize it waiting in the wings for an opportunity to do so.

I shake my head a lot at what I read here and categorize as ambient hysteria. It reminds me of an old saying that once adorned the walls of Auburn's School of Agriculture, but was removed when PC set in, "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think!" The word play of course was on horticulture, but the point was uncultured and uneducated leaves us all to be whores of the world. Well substitute slave for whore and you have what the NCAA has done to the athletes and to the schools, but when you think about it whore is still appropriate as well. We've been all working for a Pimp called the NCAA!.

If profit & revenue were the dominant concern (like it was with realignment), you'd be right. The network execs could lead the charge.

But the bolded part is the toughest part to accomplish.

If something's going to change, it has to change in a direction that the Presidents want. Notre Dame & Stanford & Wisconsin & many others won't sign up for a new organization that decreases the players' connection with the academic side of the university (because they think the connection is already too tenuous). It'll be very tough to find a solution that the Presidents, the schools' legal counsel, and the schools' accountants are happy with. So most schools (particularly in the North & West) will stick with the NCAA until a solution presents itself.

And who is most likely to come up with such a solution? Not the media executives, the conference commissioners, or the Presidents. Rather, the solution is likely to come from the organization that has the most to lose from a new system: from the NCAA itself.

The NCAA has too much money to collapse on its own weight. The only thing that will doom the NCAA is if they are so incompetent that the conference commissioners take it upon themselves to find a better solution to the NIL crisis.

What they say today and do tomorrow are two different things. Financial need and need for exposure in a time of nadir for enrollees will change their tunes. Being painted as a plantation owner benefiting from a modern vestige of slavery won't help their PC feelings either.

We've known that this was a possibility but it won't stop the Big 12/ SEC / and ACC from making the move, nor will it stop some key independents.

If folks up North choose their path it will be seen for what it is, a lesser form of the game and they can thump their chests over ethics but it won't help their exposure, their sagging population, or their futures.

Nathan Bedford Forrest once said , "The battle is generally won by the side that gets there firstest with the mostest." Not much has changed in 160 years on that front.

We agree on most of the bolded part. It will definitely be seen as inferior football.

But bad for their future? I doubt it.

Plenty of schools do just fine without big-time athletics. Only 3 of the top-11 universities offer football scholarships. Even among public schools, 11 of the top-40 don't play FBS football: William & Mary, SUNY-Binghamton, SUNY-Stony Brook, CO School of Mines, Delaware, and 6 University of California campuses.

And none of them are state schools known for their football past! It will hurt.

(05-27-2020 05:36 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 05:28 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 05:20 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Here's who is in the P5 who might choose to stay behind or be shown the door:
- Wake Forest
- Duke
- Boston College
- Washington State
- Oregon State
- Stanford
- Northwestern
- Rutgers
- Kansas State
- Baylor

Not a single college President at any of these schools would not choose to continue with the P5. Rutgers has the entire political structure of New Jersey funding it's move to P5, so they are not going anywhere. Duke, Northwestern and Stanford define themselves in P5 and have championships, especially Stanford and Duke; they have massive money and big donors. Those State schools might be relatively poor, but they are not going anywhere either.

It's delusional to think you can shed any schools in P5

Not to mention Northwestern just dumped $370 million into an IPF facility and basketball arena and is paying the country’s 2nd highest athletic director salary.

Is paying an AD more than the combined compensation of the ADs at LSU and Clemson, the two schools who won the most recent CFP championships, a wise move? Not really, but it's NW's money to burn.

(05-27-2020 04:14 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 04:09 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 03:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So don't think 65 P5 schools, but rather 54 to 60 P5 schools. And don't think all AAC schools but rather 4 to 10 of the top G5 programs inclusive of B.Y.U. in that breakaway.

Would be fascinating to see which P5 schools willingly bow out. Vanderbilt? Wake Forest? Northwestern? Notre Dame? I struggle to see any public schools make the leap, but who knows. I now think that Air Force, Army and Navy would likely choose to be left out as well.

From the AAC, I think you can easily take Cincinnati, Houston, Memphis, Temple, UCF and USF. From the MWC, you can take Boise State, Fresno State and San Diego State. Toss in BYU, that gets you your 10 teams. That keeps you, likely, under 70 total teams, and effectively cuts-in-half the FBS structure and begins to form a new coalition.

What this could do, however, is essentially eliminate both the AAC and MWC as football leagues (since only a handful of them are being brought along for football), but could possibly be reformed as non-football leagues (where all the members remain together for Olympic sports). It would, default, force those football-playing schools to be relegated to FBS-B, but still allow those programs to compete in non-football Division 1-A sports. Additionally, it could split a league like the A-10 into two (where the top is included in D1-A sports, but perhaps the bottom is left out).

Pretty sure we would be done. I cannot see Jenkins or Saavy Jack signing up for minor league football.

C'mon principle means squat with college sports and notre dame isn't above it. Notre Dame will never allow itself to be in the lower league. The boosters wont have it. Instead of playing USC, Bama and Clemson they'll be playing Sun Belt and MAC schools in a lower league? Yeah, right. Oh im sure they'll come up with some BS word salad where they can claim to still be above it all but they will most definitely come long. They have no problem being a minor league basketball program they actively sought out major basketball conferences to join instead of playing in a non feeder league.

(05-27-2020 05:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 04:47 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 03:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 03:09 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  One problem with a "breakaway" is leadership. Who will lead it?

The leading college presidents? Please. They have much bigger fish to fry at the moment.

The leading college ADs? Any meeting of the ADs will be crashed by the NCAA leadership.

The P5 commissioners? Maybe. That's a small enough group that they could lead this. But it's really tricky. Any decisions they agree on effectively will have to be ratified by the presidents of the leading schools - because you know darn well that the Presidents of Texas, Ohio State, USC, UNC, etc all view their commissioners as their employee, not their boss.

That makes it a mess. Any objections will have to be settled by 5 powerless commissioners acting as intermediaries for the decision makers. If you've ever negotiated to buy a house, imagine that instead of two parties having two intermediaries, you have 20-30 important parties with 5 intermediaries about topics that might violate labor laws or anti-monopoly laws. Again, the Presidents don't have the time to do this by themselves... they're busy plugging budget gaps of hundreds of millions of dollars and don't want to risk the bad publicity that could come from leading this crusade.

Come on you can do better than that. Who stands to make the most out of this other than the schools? Who drove the OU/UGa suit in the early 80's? It sure as hell wasn't the presidents and ADs. It was strongly encouraged behind the scenes by networks.

Have you guys stopped to consider who Mike Slive, Jim Delany, Warren, Sankey and other such guys really are? Contract lawyers for media rights companies. That's right the foxes were put in charge of the hen houses and the hens paid them!

Was realignment started by presidents and commissioners? No It was started when networks told Kramer and Delany how much more they could make by expanding.

Who is it that would like a better organized and contained football product to be a cheaper alternative to the NFL but one that had great advertising rewards because of the days on which it is played and the diverse audience it reaches? The Networks

And what was it that Howard Beal said when talking to his network executive when the executive explained to him who it was that drove the news and how it was that they made money? The fictional character from the movie Network exclaimed to Ned Beatty's character, "I have heard the voice of God." To which Ned Beatty said, "You probably have!" "It's TV dummy!" The brain trust for organization of a breakaway will be corporate in nature and will involve the commissioners who will show the AD's and College Presidents the sums they will make and the latter will drool and it will be a done deal.

IMO the biggest thing to be worked out would be subcontracted a unified officiating service, paid much better than the NCAA is, which will have its own enforcement wing and each conference will front their share of overhead to make it happen.

Once that is taken care of there isn't much else that need be done except for each athletic department to hire a legal team for the drawing up of contracts instead of grant and aids.

Those who can't wrap their heads around how far down the road this is are typical in their hysterical claims that it can't happen. It's already happening. Quit overthinking things and reacting like the sky if falling. The only thing happening, hopefully, is the death of an outdated, bloated, greedy organization that has 2 endowments of over a billion dollars total, that has no justification for ratholing that money save crisis and when one hit the first thing they did was to back away from using the endowed money to cover the schools that they exist to serve. In the South we say Piss on 'em! It's easier than people think when you have those who are dying to help you monetize and organize it waiting in the wings for an opportunity to do so.

I shake my head a lot at what I read here and categorize as ambient hysteria. It reminds me of an old saying that once adorned the walls of Auburn's School of Agriculture, but was removed when PC set in, "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think!" The word play of course was on horticulture, but the point was uncultured and uneducated leaves us all to be whores of the world. Well substitute slave for whore and you have what the NCAA has done to the athletes and to the schools, but when you think about it whore is still appropriate as well. We've been all working for a Pimp called the NCAA!.

If profit & revenue were the dominant concern (like it was with realignment), you'd be right. The network execs could lead the charge.

But the bolded part is the toughest part to accomplish.

If something's going to change, it has to change in a direction that the Presidents want. Notre Dame & Stanford & Wisconsin & many others won't sign up for a new organization that decreases the players' connection with the academic side of the university (because they think the connection is already too tenuous). It'll be very tough to find a solution that the Presidents, the schools' legal counsel, and the schools' accountants are happy with. So most schools (particularly in the North & West) will stick with the NCAA until a solution presents itself.

And who is most likely to come up with such a solution? Not the media executives, the conference commissioners, or the Presidents. Rather, the solution is likely to come from the organization that has the most to lose from a new system: from the NCAA itself.

The NCAA has too much money to collapse on its own weight. The only thing that will doom the NCAA is if they are so incompetent that the conference commissioners take it upon themselves to find a better solution to the NIL crisis.

What they say today and do tomorrow are two different things. Financial need and need for exposure in a time of nadir for enrollees will change their tunes. Being painted as a plantation owner benefiting from a modern vestige of slavery won't help their PC feelings either.

We've known that this was a possibility but it won't stop the Big 12/ SEC / and ACC from making the move, nor will it stop some key independents.

If folks up North choose their path it will be seen for what it is, a lesser form of the game and they can thump their chests over ethics but it won't help their exposure, their sagging population, or their futures.

Nathan Bedford Forrest once said , "The battle is generally won by the side that gets there firstest with the mostest." Not much has changed in 160 years on that front.

Oh lets all hear what the founder of the KKK said! I'm sure it's just full of folksy wisdom!

They've said this every off-season since the beginning. & there's many reasons they don't.

I'll believe it when I see it.

What’s the point of a P5 breakaway?

At this point we have the best of all worlds

near total Autonomy for football only and the NCAA tournament for basketball

What’s more, the D1 peace treaty still exists.

Tulane and San Jose State get to sell prospective recruits and students on being in the same division as Duke and Alabama while Duke and Alabama get to count wins over Tulane and San Jose State towards bowl and tournament eligibility.

As flawed and corrupt as the NCAA might be, the proposed P5-based athletic organization would probably be more flawed and more corrupt, since its founding principle would be profit, above all else.

(05-27-2020 06:00 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  What’s the point of a P5 breakaway?

At this point we have the best of all worlds

near total Autonomy for football only and the NCAA tournament for basketball

What’s more, the D1 peace treaty still exists.

Tulane and San Jose State get to sell prospective recruits and students on being in the same division as Duke and Alabama while Duke and Alabama get to count wins over Tulane and San Jose State towards bowl and tournament eligibility.

More money. Thats the entire point.

BTW if this does happen then the playoffs are expanding. Oh and the whole bowl system will be reorganized.

(05-27-2020 05:43 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 05:28 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 05:20 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Here's who is in the P5 who might choose to stay behind or be shown the door:
- Wake Forest
- Duke
- Boston College
- Washington State
- Oregon State
- Stanford
- Northwestern
- Rutgers
- Kansas State
- Baylor

Not a single college President at any of these schools would not choose to continue with the P5. Rutgers has the entire political structure of New Jersey funding it's move to P5, so they are not going anywhere. Duke, Northwestern and Stanford define themselves in P5 and have championships, especially Stanford and Duke; they have massive money and big donors. Those State schools might be relatively poor, but they are not going anywhere either.

It's delusional to think you can shed any schools in P5

Baylor, KSU, Oregon St, Wazzu may be shown the door. They barely qualify as universities at this point.

Not an iota of truth to this statement. All 4 schools are ranked in the top 166.

(05-27-2020 05:55 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  They've said this every off-season since the beginning. & there's many reasons they don't.

I'll believe it when I see it.

It’s the #1 go-to article when a writer needs clickbait.

San Jose State students don't care. The only ones who care are the College Presidents and those who worry about school prestige. Enrollment at SJSU, and really every CSU or UC, has nothing to do with sports. They are all impacted because the State does not provide enough seats.

This isnt a p5 breakaway. What a sham.

Its just kicking out the MAC, Sun Belt and CUSA, as mentioned by others.

(05-27-2020 06:16 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  This isnt a p5 breakaway. What a sham.

Its just kicking out the MAC, Sun Belt and CUSA, as mentioned by others.

Dodd is more inclusive than I think the P5 would be.

Out another way, there may be a desire to play everyone, but there is no desire to pay everyone. The latter is more important than the former.

(05-27-2020 05:28 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(05-27-2020 05:20 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Here's who is in the P5 who might choose to stay behind or be shown the door:
- Wake Forest
- Duke
- Boston College
- Washington State
- Oregon State
- Stanford
- Northwestern
- Rutgers
- Kansas State
- Baylor

Not a single college President at any of these schools would not choose to continue with the P5. Rutgers has the entire political structure of New Jersey funding it's move to P5, so they are not going anywhere. Duke, Northwestern and Stanford define themselves in P5 and have championships, especially Stanford and Duke; they have massive money and big donors. Those State schools might be relatively poor, but they are not going anywhere either.

It's delusional to think you can shed any schools in P5

It isn't necessarily the choice of those Presidents. Rutgers may have the whole state of NJ behind it but the state of NJ itself is emptying like the bread and milk aisles in Atlanta before a snow storm. NJ is the 3rd most popular state attending Clemson ... because it's cheaper to attend Clemson out of state with no help than it is to attend Rutgers in state with no help. So not only are the demographics upside down in NJ but so are Rutgers' tuition and fees.

Stanford and Duke are more likely to choose to stay behind than be left behind however both are structurally not really cut out for football. Stanford tried and was successful ... and nobody cared and the brand new modestly sized all chairback stadium remained half empty. Duke is what Stanford would look like if they straight up didn't try in football. Duke may have big donors but they've shown a reticence to invest it in football and a flat out incompetence of how to run a football program. Though I'm sure Alabama appreciated their 50+ point wins and playing a home game on the road in Durham.

Delusion to think ANY schools can be shed in the P5? Vanderbilt is a straight up welfare queen. They take that SEC football check and then use it to field a really good baseball team and little else. Wake Forest is structurally not cut out for football and they don't have the necessary market penetration in the Piedmont Triad to offset their tiny enrollment. There are several more structurally unhealthy athletic departments littered around the P5, some of them with bigger names than you'd think. Find the schools fielding really large numbers of non-revenue teams to pursue the Capital One Cup and follow the red the ink from there. Maryland's finances were VERY ugly long before they left the ACC. There are several P5s toting around over $100m in straight up debt in their athletic department. It's been a few years but last I looked Cal-Berkeley was the leader in the clubhouse at well past $300m in debt.

The NCAA lost credibility when the mechanism for enforcing rules became inconsistent and highly political. The favored received excessive accommodation, while others, often with less serious violations, received comparatively higher sanctions. There was a reason D. Dodd mentioned the UNC academic fraud scandal that resulted in basically zero external sanctions. That offended many that were familiar with the situation.

The P5 are not actually victims in the NCAA mess. They have been a powerful component and often got their way on most matters. The smaller schools didn't legislate and vote as NCAA members in a vacuum or as a powerful super majority. The membership could have intervened in how their executives disbursed yielded basketball profits.

What has happened is that internal interests diverged and finances are the catalyst. As said earlier, the divide between the "haves" and "have nots" steadily grew until the collectivism has become absurd.

Let the breakup happen and each of the athletic groupings find and define their own way.

Perhaps the NCAA could still exist, but not as a governance or enforcement entity. It could still be useful as a forum where all levels of college athletics communicate, share ideas, address common problems, etc. If there is going to be crossover scheduling of any sort, some methodology needs to be done with appreciable consensus.

The P5 is going to separate and this time they really, really, really, really mean it!

Dodd contradicts himself. A 100 school breakaway is not a P5 breakaway.

There will be a true P5/P6 (hoops) break, or nothing.

Bet on nothing.