My reading of the various Big Ten and SEC people who have been writing about the coming P2 that will ultimately will remain as the only 2 leagues that play Major College Football is that they assume that if almost all teams currently in 1A/FBS are culled down into 2 leagues of between 16 and 24. Their faith is that if Major CFB is no larger than the NFL, then those few teams can be paid as much money as the NFL.
Then there are other people who favor a culling but know that too much culling will slowly kill Major CFB from being what is has been by making most general football fans see Major CFB as not theirs. Most of those people think that the culling must leave at least 4 conferences with at least 60 teams total in order maintain fan interest across the country.
My view is that because CFB cannot be separated in any sense, including fanbases, from C basketball and baseball, the culling for Major CFB must also include at least those 2 sports. I think for football, you need 5-7 conferences that have a total of at least 75 teams. I think then that another 2 to 4 leagues, with a total of at least 20 members) should be part of its basketball and baseball, as well as any other sports that this group wishes to sponsor.
And yes, that group can survive and profit even better outside the NCAA, provided it arranges its own leadership for the whole and not just for the BT and SEC.
Along the line of sensing that the sport needs/requires more than just the BT and SEC as Supers, Pat Forde has written an article about putting together a possible #3 Power league.
Forde makes a statement early that I think explains UNC and most of the ACC very well: "It’s quite possible that some of the top candidates for the BORC would likewise hitch their wagon to an 18- to 20-team Big Ten or SEC instead of this outfit. But on the flip side, there is something to be said for being the big dog in a good league instead of the 17th invitee to a shark tank (and possibly taking a smaller revenue share to join)."
I do not want UNC 'forced' into either BT or SEC. I would much prefer to have the ACC survive and UNC, for the first time ever, emphasize football-first as a permanent status. I do not think that this Forde idea can go anywhere. The biggest football and basketball name brands on the West Coast, both located in the nation's 2nd largest TV market, joining the midwestern based BT can work for those schools because they already have a massive TV market and a very long and deep history with the BT. There are no such things that could ever make Washington, Oregon, UNC, and Clemson in the same conference work cohesively. So my view is that the ACC should act not to create some kind of new league of mixed parts, but instead should make itself stronger in football terms, which means adding hot football rivalries, adding schools that can average at least 50K per game, adding schools located in areas that are football hotbeds (both for fan interest and recruiting). To do the adding I would drop Wake and BC. The 3 I would add all make Forde's list: WVU, Cincy, UCF.
Then I think the ACC office needs to be proactive by making deals with both the Pac and Big XII to have significant OOC games every year. If the ACC has the best package of OOC games, that will increase the value of ACC football. It also will best prepare ACC teams to face the post season. Both the Pac and Big XII have suffered major losses that will cut their TV value a god deal. So both need some kind of arrangement to help beef up their games for TV interest. On our side, UNC vs. FAMU and UNC vs. Ga St have essentially 0 TV value. UNC vs. App At has TV value only in NC, which we already have. UNC vs. Washington St, Oregon St, and Kansas has some TV value even if all 3 end up with losing records. UNC vs. Washington, Oregon, and Texas Tech could be worth a good deal.
Then there are other people who favor a culling but know that too much culling will slowly kill Major CFB from being what is has been by making most general football fans see Major CFB as not theirs. Most of those people think that the culling must leave at least 4 conferences with at least 60 teams total in order maintain fan interest across the country.
My view is that because CFB cannot be separated in any sense, including fanbases, from C basketball and baseball, the culling for Major CFB must also include at least those 2 sports. I think for football, you need 5-7 conferences that have a total of at least 75 teams. I think then that another 2 to 4 leagues, with a total of at least 20 members) should be part of its basketball and baseball, as well as any other sports that this group wishes to sponsor.
And yes, that group can survive and profit even better outside the NCAA, provided it arranges its own leadership for the whole and not just for the BT and SEC.
Along the line of sensing that the sport needs/requires more than just the BT and SEC as Supers, Pat Forde has written an article about putting together a possible #3 Power league.
Forde makes a statement early that I think explains UNC and most of the ACC very well: "It’s quite possible that some of the top candidates for the BORC would likewise hitch their wagon to an 18- to 20-team Big Ten or SEC instead of this outfit. But on the flip side, there is something to be said for being the big dog in a good league instead of the 17th invitee to a shark tank (and possibly taking a smaller revenue share to join)."
I do not want UNC 'forced' into either BT or SEC. I would much prefer to have the ACC survive and UNC, for the first time ever, emphasize football-first as a permanent status. I do not think that this Forde idea can go anywhere. The biggest football and basketball name brands on the West Coast, both located in the nation's 2nd largest TV market, joining the midwestern based BT can work for those schools because they already have a massive TV market and a very long and deep history with the BT. There are no such things that could ever make Washington, Oregon, UNC, and Clemson in the same conference work cohesively. So my view is that the ACC should act not to create some kind of new league of mixed parts, but instead should make itself stronger in football terms, which means adding hot football rivalries, adding schools that can average at least 50K per game, adding schools located in areas that are football hotbeds (both for fan interest and recruiting). To do the adding I would drop Wake and BC. The 3 I would add all make Forde's list: WVU, Cincy, UCF.
Then I think the ACC office needs to be proactive by making deals with both the Pac and Big XII to have significant OOC games every year. If the ACC has the best package of OOC games, that will increase the value of ACC football. It also will best prepare ACC teams to face the post season. Both the Pac and Big XII have suffered major losses that will cut their TV value a god deal. So both need some kind of arrangement to help beef up their games for TV interest. On our side, UNC vs. FAMU and UNC vs. Ga St have essentially 0 TV value. UNC vs. App At has TV value only in NC, which we already have. UNC vs. Washington St, Oregon St, and Kansas has some TV value even if all 3 end up with losing records. UNC vs. Washington, Oregon, and Texas Tech could be worth a good deal.
