SIAP But Wow. Literally the end of college football as we've known it.

[BigBlueFanGA]

While SEC and Big Ten leaders mull major changes, a new Super League concept could radically alter college sports

As SEC and Big Ten leaders prepare to meet this week in Nashville for a historic summit of the industry’s two powers, there is an unreported undercurrent driving the discussion: Project Rudy.

sports.yahoo.com

Something like this is probably going to happen sooner rather than later.

 

[jeffky]

They were discussing this on ksr the other day and will be set up like soccer leagues 6 teams in each league the downfall will be recruiting all the big name teams will get all the great players

 

[gojvc]

You could merge the conferences, end games against G5 teams, and expand the playoff without having some wicked private equity firm coming in and skimming value off the top.

 

[Cotaay]

I don’t think the Big 10/SEC need this so it likely isn’t happening. The tier system would keep the elite teams elite, but after that the leveling of the playing field doesn’t really benefit a majority of the 2 conferences.

No need to split 100% if the pie 70 ways when you can split 80% of it 34 ways. We haven’t really seen the impact these new tv contracts are going to have yet, but why would the big 2 give up their power/advantage?

 

[vhcat70]

Assume UK would be Tier 2.

 

[The-Hack]

As stated in the piece, these ideas are “football only.”

Oddly, UK might welcome being outside the first proposed tier of distribution, as it is one of a handful of schools to have a clearly profitable basketball program, allowing it an undivided revenue stream unavailable to most. With the naming rights still available for an on campus arena, the $$ generated from selling those rights, plus the cokes and popcorn, tickets, and TV money would likely make more money for UK than would be shorted by being below the 16 team “First Tier.”

Yes, “this is being driven by football, alone,” as college basketball across the spectrum is essentially a break even proposition at best. But for select schools like Kentucky, Kansas, U of L, and maybe 10 or 12 others, the exclusion of basketball proceeds from a division of profits is a net-plus, worth millions per year.

 

[The-Hack]

We haven’t really seen the impact these new tv contracts are going to have yet, but why would the big 2 give up their power/advantage?

They would only do so if they decide to screw their less profitable current members. In other words, Bama, Georgia LSU and the other big boys conspire with Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State, to leave Vandy, Mississippi State, IU and Illinois on a lower tier.

Again, oddly, for the handful of schools with profitable basketball programs, the complete exclusion of basketball from this idea might make it more palatable.

Perhaps the ultimate question is if the Top 16 most profitable football schools are willing to cast aside the long-held affinity for less profitable conference brethren.

And when money is involved, I suspect the Top Schools are likeliest to say “I am not my brother’s keeper.”

 

[bthaunert]

College football already went through something similar in 1978 with the creation of Division I-A and I-AA. 1982 was more significant because that's when the entirety of I-AA was established after a lot of schools couldn't meet the I-A perimeters. This will be more of that, with a lot more money involved.