• The KillerFrogs

Where do we end up...? Poll

What conference does TCU end up in?

  • Stay in the Big 12

    Votes: 51 22.1%
  • PAC 16

    Votes: 98 42.4%
  • Big 10

    Votes: 2 0.9%
  • ACC

    Votes: 15 6.5%
  • AAC/Mountain West/Conference USA

    Votes: 64 27.7%
  • Independent

    Votes: 1 0.4%

  • Total voters
    231

Nick Danger

Active Member
In regards to the idea of shrinking down the number of "big time" conferences to just three super conferences (say the ACC, Big 10/12/16 whatever, and the SEC 16/18/20 whatever), with there no longer being a Big 12, PAC 12, Mountain West, or AAC, don't you also run the risk of shrinking down the college football available audience?

Under this Super 3 conferences scenario, you would only have "big time college football" east of Interstate 35! With the old fans of every school west of that demarcation line no longer enjoying even the slimmest hope of "making the playoffs". It just seems like their enthusiasm for watching a Texas/OU matchup, much less a Indiana/Kentucky one, will dissipate faster than a fart in a Gulf Coast hurricane.

I doubt that's what ESPN or whoever had in mind when they started this. And that's not even taking in to account the previously mentioned problem for the "Haves" of no longer padding their win-column with the likes of Kansas, Baylor, Tulsa, Louisiana Tech, etc. Even with 30 something previously big-time schools consistently fighting over 12 playoff spots, even these 3 super conferences will soon find themselves separating out into a new "Haves" and a new "Have Nots"segments.

It just seems, perhaps naively, that the media giants would be better off not going the route of Dishwashing liquid and concentrate their power too much! Maintaining a reservoir of hope for some of the remnants of the AAC, Mountain West, Big/Little 12, and the PAC-12, would tend to keep those folks watching. That would be a better long-term investment for these media king-makers than grinding these lesser conferences underfoot and scattering their remains to the four winds!
 

Wexahu

Full Member
In regards to the idea of shrinking down the number of "big time" conferences to just three super conferences (say the ACC, Big 10/12/16 whatever, and the SEC 16/18/20 whatever), with there no longer being a Big 12, PAC 12, Mountain West, or AAC, don't you also run the risk of shrinking down the college football available audience?

Under this Super 3 conferences scenario, you would only have "big time college football" east of Interstate 35! With the old fans of every school west of that demarcation line no longer enjoying even the slimmest hope of "making the playoffs", it just seems like their enthusiasm for watching a Texas/OU matchup, much less a Indiana/Kentucky one, will dissipate faster than a fart in a Gulf Coast hurricane.

I doubt that's what ESPN or whoever had in mind when they started this. And that's not even taking in to account the previously mentioned problem for the "Haves" of no longer padding their win-column with the likes of Kansas, Baylor, Tulsa, Louisiana Tech, etc. Even with 30 something previously big-time schools consistently fighting over 12 playoff spots, even these 3 super conferences will soon find themselves separating out into a new "Haves" and a new "Have Nots"segments.

It just seems, perhaps naively, that the media giants would be better off not going the route of Dishwashing liquid and concentrate their power too much! Maintaining a reservoir of hope for some of the remnants of the AAC, Mountain West, Big/Little 12, and the PAC-12, would tend to keep those folks watching. That would be a better long-term investment for these media king-makers than grinding these lesser conferences underfoot and scattering their remains to the four winds!

Some good points. Very short sighted thinking all around IMO, but there's no stopping it now.

One thing though, I'm not sure the ACC is really any different than the P12 or B12 in terms of viability. It's one or two schools exiting from football irrelevance and rest assured those one or two schools aren't just going to watch what is happening and stand pat.
 

Eight

Member
In regards to the idea of shrinking down the number of "big time" conferences to just three super conferences (say the ACC, Big 10/12/16 whatever, and the SEC 16/18/20 whatever), with there no longer being a Big 12, PAC 12, Mountain West, or AAC, don't you also run the risk of shrinking down the college football available audience?

Under this Super 3 conferences scenario, you would only have "big time college football" east of Interstate 35! With the old fans of every school west of that demarcation line no longer enjoying even the slimmest hope of "making the playoffs". It just seems like their enthusiasm for watching a Texas/OU matchup, much less a Indiana/Kentucky one, will dissipate faster than a fart in a Gulf Coast hurricane.

I doubt that's what ESPN or whoever had in mind when they started this. And that's not even taking in to account the previously mentioned problem for the "Haves" of no longer padding their win-column with the likes of Kansas, Baylor, Tulsa, Louisiana Tech, etc. Even with 30 something previously big-time schools consistently fighting over 12 playoff spots, even these 3 super conferences will soon find themselves separating out into a new "Haves" and a new "Have Nots"segments.

It just seems, perhaps naively, that the media giants would be better off not going the route of Dishwashing liquid and concentrate their power too much! Maintaining a reservoir of hope for some of the remnants of the AAC, Mountain West, Big/Little 12, and the PAC-12, would tend to keep those folks watching. That would be a better long-term investment for these media king-makers than grinding these lesser conferences underfoot and scattering their remains to the four winds!

agree with much of what you are saying and i think if cooler heads prevailed and things were done in a bit more transparent fashion we wouldn't see the rushed responses i think we might see in the next few months

compare it to the "shortages" we saw roughly a year ago of various products that got spurred with reports that there might be shortages due to supply chain issues as a consequence of covid shutdowns

some of that was true, but did it HAVE to play out the way it did or was it a byproduct of people hoarding, no real guidance and structure and things happened the way they happened

unfortunately with college football we have obscene amounts of money, adiministrators protecting their jobs, egos, and no one central authority.
 

steelfrog

Tier 1
SEC East will be Bama, Vandy, Kentucky, Tennessee, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina and Florida; West will be the Mississippi teams, Ark, Mizzou, LSU, A&M, OU and UT
 

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
Oh, there's a central authority all right, and it's thoroughly evil...

I am coming to believe that this is merely a way to Nationally skim the cream of the ratings-grabbing Programs and set them apart. That's it. Hence the USC/UCLA to the B1G rumor-mongering, or the Miami/Fla. St. to the SEC buzz. Kills off the PAC and the ACC, doesn't it.

Over on SurlyHorns, they are breaking down the vast sums of money that ESPN will be paying them for moving: Some $50 million/yr. And, that's for all the SEC members. The SEC expands and the pie slices just get bigger! I imagine this has been floated by the B1G as well, and is what is fueling the USC/UCLA rumors. I suppose that ESPN thinks they can afford this if they implode the lesser Conferences and just shift the money to their cash cows.

It's curious that none of the Streamers are even entering into any discussions, or even making any statements. All of this is being driven by one entity and one entity alone.
 

Mean Purple

Active Member
SEC East will be Bama, Vandy, Kentucky, Tennessee, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina and Florida; West will be the Mississippi teams, Ark, Mizzou, LSU, A&M, OU and UT
That's how I see it panning out. Auburn already has a great rival with Georgia. (The oldest for their conference and part of the country.) Bama has Tenn. LSU will just be a crossover each year for Bama. Texas does not want any part of bama. They'll have enough time with Ole Miss.
 

Mean Purple

Active Member
"If only Houston, Cincinnati and BYU were in the conference, we wouldn't go to the SEC" - Texas/Oklahoma?

Yeah, gonna go ahead and doubt that one.
drop the inferiority complex already. The conference could have poached teams from the big 10 and pac. and my statement was not about keeping the whorens and toothless lotto ticket punchers. It is the reality that as they leave, we would have had at least 10 teams still. Making it more survivable.
 

steelfrog

Tier 1
That's how I see it panning out. Auburn already has a great rival with Georgia. (The oldest for their conference and part of the country.) Bama has Tenn. LSU will just be a crossover each year for Bama. Texas does not want any part of bama. They'll have enough time with Ole Miss.
That’s correct. And, more significantly, A&M wants nothing to do with Bama. Hence the abrupt recent about face.
 

Rabidfrog

Active Member
I think it all ends up breaking out something like:

- SEC Super League or whatever it's called-32 teams

- NCAA 1A- Five, 12-team regional leagues similar to older days. TCU, Baylor, SMU, Houston, Rice, UTEP, UTSA, Texas Tech, Tulsa, Oklahoma State,

Then you would have another of Wake Forrest, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, Memphis, UCF, South Florida, East Carolina, etc...

Out west would have Oregon State, Washington State, Boise State, UNLV, Utah, etc...

- NCAA 2A- all the others

The universities won't want to dump football completely and have these big stadiums sitting empty so regional matchups will help with traveling fans. The 1A's will find streaming partners. There will still be bowl games but not nearly as many.

ESPN will show these games if the super league isn't playing. Playoff games will replace bowl content so they won't need as many.

It will all fall under the NCAA umbrella so the sec super league and the NCAA can make money from the basketball tournament, but in football they will consider the super league separate basically. Ncaa still wants the cash from basketball, and they need the larger schools for that, in exchange, the super league can govern itself for football.
Creative post, thanks.
 

HG73

Active Member
In regards to the idea of shrinking down the number of "big time" conferences to just three super conferences (say the ACC, Big 10/12/16 whatever, and the SEC 16/18/20 whatever), with there no longer being a Big 12, PAC 12, Mountain West, or AAC, don't you also run the risk of shrinking down the college football available audience?

Under this Super 3 conferences scenario, you would only have "big time college football" east of Interstate 35! With the old fans of every school west of that demarcation line no longer enjoying even the slimmest hope of "making the playoffs". It just seems like their enthusiasm for watching a Texas/OU matchup, much less a Indiana/Kentucky one, will dissipate faster than a fart in a Gulf Coast hurricane.

I doubt that's what ESPN or whoever had in mind when they started this. And that's not even taking in to account the previously mentioned problem for the "Haves" of no longer padding their win-column with the likes of Kansas, Baylor, Tulsa, Louisiana Tech, etc. Even with 30 something previously big-time schools consistently fighting over 12 playoff spots, even these 3 super conferences will soon find themselves separating out into a new "Haves" and a new "Have Nots"segments.

It just seems, perhaps naively, that the media giants would be better off not going the route of Dishwashing liquid and concentrate their power too much! Maintaining a reservoir of hope for some of the remnants of the AAC, Mountain West, Big/Little 12, and the PAC-12, would tend to keep those folks watching. That would be a better long-term investment for these media king-makers than grinding these lesser conferences underfoot and scattering their remains to the four winds!
I think it will only be two conferences of 18 teams each. B1G will poach USC, UCLA, UW, UO. SEC will grab Clem and FSU.
 
I think it will only be two conferences of 18 teams each. B1G will poach USC, UCLA, UW, UO. SEC will grab Clem and FSU.
I think UNC and UVA will also get added at some point. Maybe a few others. But agree that is where we are heading.

The question will be if those leagues split off from the NCAA. Obviously they could but the question in my mind is if that is in their best interest. Not sure it is.
 

Eight

Member
I think UNC and UVA will also get added at some point. Maybe a few others. But agree that is where we are heading.

The question will be if those leagues split off from the NCAA. Obviously they could but the question in my mind is if that is in their best interest. Not sure it is.

if they want to create their own set of rules such yes, serious question is exactly what value does the ncaa bring to college football at this time other than poor leadership, rules than are oudated, ambiguously applied, and can't be applied if someone hires a good lawyer

they don't negotiate the tv contracts, really have no authority over the conferences, and don't really run the bowls and the cfp at the p5 level so what exactly do they do that brings value to the p5 schools
 

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
From Outkick: https://www.outkick.com/the-secs-ma...ke-that-paved-the-way-for-texas-and-oklahoma/

It details the deal made by the SEC Grand Poo-Bah with ESPN in 2019 that any "A-List" team that joined the SEC would get the same amount of money as all the other teams were before the deal. No one would have their shares diluted. This gave him the ability to offer a deal that no one else could.

The other thing is, this sort-of confirms that any mergers, additions, whatever will only be viable if ESPN approves the deal first...
 
Top