ADVERTISEMENT

Why none of this may matter.

I honestly think that was some of the strategy of not joining the PAC and taking the money. The break away super league was looming.

G5 will have it own version of national championship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LVRebel2000
I watched the Wrexham (soccer) series on Netflix and quite enjoyed it with the whole relegation aspect of it. They were able to move up 2 divisions in 3 years after being in the lowest division for 15 years. Some time ago, they were in the 2nd highest division (Champions League) for a while and had a number of bad seasons dropping them down to the lowest.

I'm sorry last I checked this was America where we talk about Football, not some game played by foppish Brits.
 
That's where I lose all interest.
Not nearly as much, but March Madness lost a little bit of oomph for me when they started adding more teams.

But to be honest, UNLV not being even close had a lot to do with it too.

If we don’t have any opportunity whatsoever, no matter how unrealistic … to compete with the big boys, yeah, feels really lame.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LVRebel2000
If raising awareness, rallying people, etc …. Made any difference whatsoever …. Then you do that. But it doesn’t. We don’t control what’s going to happen, it’s bigger than us individually or collectively.

So you’re with, enjoy any good that there is … the rest will play out.
If the football system is rebuilt, there are a lot of teams in the power 4 conferences that would also be left on the sideline. Higly unlikely that teams like Northwestern, Vanderbilt, California, Stanford, West Virginia, Cincinnati, UCF, TCU, Purdue, Rutgers, etc. would still be part of the final group. My expectation is that ultimately the teams in control like Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Georgia, USC, etc. will continue to be greedy and ultimately destroy the media cash flow due to more and more areas of the country losing interest in watching these games when they involve regional teams from other areas of the country that are of no interest outside of those areas. Considering less than 5 percent of potential viewers watch the top rated college football games, they do not really have a lot of wiggle room before funds will start to dry up. More and more people have walked away from cable and traditional TV, and now it is becoming much more common to pay for streaming services, but how many people are going to be willing to pay for streaming services to watch teams that do not interest them?
 
The article states that even within the 70 schools though, they would have tiers, with the top group getting significantly more money than tier two, and tier three.
Without go back to the article, the dispersion amounts for the various tiers were still a lot more than the existing payouts. It compared the tiers to current conferences and the payouts were like double.

Also, there are 67 teams in AQs, but then you have to add Notre Dame… so 68.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LVRebel2000
Not nearly as much, but March Madness lost a little bit of oomph for me when they started adding more teams.

But to be honest, UNLV not being even close had a lot to do with it too.

If we don’t have any opportunity whatsoever, no matter how unrealistic … to compete with the big boys, yeah, feels really lame.

I just wouldn't care anymore honestly. Without a 'relegation/promotion' aspect why would boosters care anymore or donate for the other 'championship'. Unless the money is so astronomical to pass up, why would a school like Vany or Illinois or ASU agree to a system where they could get demoted?
 
Without go back to the article, the dispersion amounts for the various tiers were still a lot more than the existing payouts. It compared the tiers to current conferences and the payouts were like double.

Also, there are 67 teams in AQs, but then you have to add Notre Dame… so 68.
I suspect the 70 number came when Wazzu and Oregon St. were included. Sadly for them, no more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oneepstein
What is interesting with all of this is what are they looking for with inclusion to the "haves". Are they looking at media value only, or are they trying to get the 70 best teams?
I think it may be tough to exclude bad teams in good conferences, but they could?

As for us going or staying when it comes to the PAC, I doubt that would have any bearing in being invited to the big boy table. If they downgrade teams and upgrade teams, it will not matter if we are in the PAC or MW. The new PAC teams do not need to be kicking themselves now. The Superconference will take any team they want regardless of conference.
 
Last edited:
I just wouldn't care anymore honestly. Without a 'relegation/promotion' aspect why would boosters care anymore or donate for the other 'championship'. Unless the money is so astronomical to pass up, why would a school like Vany or Illinois or ASU agree to a system where they could get demoted?
That's my point with regards to this plan. The people planning this think they're going to capture the whole CFB tv market, but I feel like they would actually significantly decrease it. And why would the bottom 2/3 of the 70 teams agree to this? They'd probably be better off teaming up and saying screw off. Worst case would be those top 16 or so schools try to break off and form their own league. If that's the case.
iu
 
Lets make every season predictable and the same. They might as well set in stone when we play each team in our “region”. What a terrible idea. This is a lazy cookie cutter short term solution, that is penny wise, but dollar dumb.

I’ve loved our OOC schedule this year. Its been fun meeting and connecting with new fanbases and learning about different programs.
 
  • Love
Reactions: LVRebel2000
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT