settling of ACC/FSU/Clemson lawsuits
Well worth the read. Especially for the idiot, and far too few of them, fans of Wake and the northeastern schools, this is the most important part:
"The Pac-12 used to do the same, financially rewarding the schools that appeared on television the most, allowing the Los Angeles-based schools -- USC and UCLA -- to greatly benefit. Eventually, the other Pac-12 schools got frustrated with the unequal revenue sharing and came up with a plan to stop it.
When that plan was revealed, then-USC AD Pat Haden threatened to leave the conference if his school didn't receive a greater cut of the financial pie. It'd be more than a decade for that threat to be realized, but eventually, USC and UCLA left for the greener pastures of the Big Ten. That started the implosion that ultimately toppled the Pac-12 leaving only Oregon State and Washington State.
Chris Hill, the former long-time Utah AD who was in the room when Haden made his threat, said not giving USC a bigger cut proved to be a fatal error.
"We should have woken up and said this is unique," Hill said in The Price: What It Takes to Win College Football's Era of Chaos. "We have one market that dominates and we need to recognize that and give them more money since we're all making a lot more money and accept that. We didn't do that. At the end of the day, that was a big mistake."
The ACC learned from the Pac-12's missteps, with schools realizing taking a financial hit to keep the conference together is better than the alternative. The bigger question is: Will other conferences have to follow suit?"
Of equal interest to me is:
"The theme of the 2030s could be consolidation rather than the realignment that has enveloped the sport in recent years.
"Wouldn't it be better if we could increase the size of the pie and shrink the number of pieces?" former NCAA president Mark Emmert told me last year. "Because of the self-interest thing, they are more than happy to raid each other's conferences, but sooner or later, they are going to have to turn on each other."
That can happen in one of two ways, and I think we will see it. One way is that by 2036, BT and SEC will have decimated the ACC forever. At that point, they agree to finalize a system in which there are only 2 major confences with total control over CFB. They will have the power to force ND in or to be cut out totally. The playoffs they run will be closed to just those two leagues, which each will have 20-24 members. I think under that scenario each boots 1-3 current members as it adds from the ACC and possibly the Big 12 (say the AZ schools and/or Utah and maybe Colorado).
The other way is that 3 leagues survive as Major. If that happens, then I doubt that BT and SEC boot anybody as they will be assured that the #3 league will be poorer than 1 and 2. In that case, either ACC or Big 12 could be that #3, but each would need to drop its biggest deadweight and add from the other to become #3 of 3 major conferences. The playoffs then would be restricted to those 3 leagues.
Well worth the read. Especially for the idiot, and far too few of them, fans of Wake and the northeastern schools, this is the most important part:
"The Pac-12 used to do the same, financially rewarding the schools that appeared on television the most, allowing the Los Angeles-based schools -- USC and UCLA -- to greatly benefit. Eventually, the other Pac-12 schools got frustrated with the unequal revenue sharing and came up with a plan to stop it.
When that plan was revealed, then-USC AD Pat Haden threatened to leave the conference if his school didn't receive a greater cut of the financial pie. It'd be more than a decade for that threat to be realized, but eventually, USC and UCLA left for the greener pastures of the Big Ten. That started the implosion that ultimately toppled the Pac-12 leaving only Oregon State and Washington State.
Chris Hill, the former long-time Utah AD who was in the room when Haden made his threat, said not giving USC a bigger cut proved to be a fatal error.
"We should have woken up and said this is unique," Hill said in The Price: What It Takes to Win College Football's Era of Chaos. "We have one market that dominates and we need to recognize that and give them more money since we're all making a lot more money and accept that. We didn't do that. At the end of the day, that was a big mistake."
The ACC learned from the Pac-12's missteps, with schools realizing taking a financial hit to keep the conference together is better than the alternative. The bigger question is: Will other conferences have to follow suit?"
Of equal interest to me is:
"The theme of the 2030s could be consolidation rather than the realignment that has enveloped the sport in recent years.
"Wouldn't it be better if we could increase the size of the pie and shrink the number of pieces?" former NCAA president Mark Emmert told me last year. "Because of the self-interest thing, they are more than happy to raid each other's conferences, but sooner or later, they are going to have to turn on each other."
That can happen in one of two ways, and I think we will see it. One way is that by 2036, BT and SEC will have decimated the ACC forever. At that point, they agree to finalize a system in which there are only 2 major confences with total control over CFB. They will have the power to force ND in or to be cut out totally. The playoffs they run will be closed to just those two leagues, which each will have 20-24 members. I think under that scenario each boots 1-3 current members as it adds from the ACC and possibly the Big 12 (say the AZ schools and/or Utah and maybe Colorado).
The other way is that 3 leagues survive as Major. If that happens, then I doubt that BT and SEC boot anybody as they will be assured that the #3 league will be poorer than 1 and 2. In that case, either ACC or Big 12 could be that #3, but each would need to drop its biggest deadweight and add from the other to become #3 of 3 major conferences. The playoffs then would be restricted to those 3 leagues.
