(03-05-2022 10:24 PM)Acres Wrote:  This espn article, states it simply be a majority vote for e pension to proceed. It’s buried in apple news .


https://apple.news/AiNxG_NrkToSTIGY6Uvbs_A

In theory, the approval of expansion should be easier in 2026 because it doesn't have to be unanimous. There's no contract to unwind. Instead, a majority of the 11 would need to vote in favor of the proposal, including a majority of the Power 5 conferences. Once a format is agreed upon, every stakeholder can decide if they want to participate.

It goes on to state ( paraphrasing) that the ACC could still object to expansion but it wouldn’t matter at that point. The only log that may spoke up the wheel is the SEC threat to re-evaluate its position regarding expansion in the future.

It could matter, because those voting "no" do not have to participate in the playoff system that is agreed to by the others.

In the case of say the MAC not agreeing, nobody would care.

In the case of the SEC not agreeing, that would sink the whole system.

If the ACC refuses to participate? That could matter, because the ACC does matter. The system e.g. would be compromised if Dabo has one of his Clemson super-teams and they aren't involved in a playoffs.

When the BIG announces their bazillion tv deal this summer , it will trigger another round of expansion, this time by pac12 and Big12 . The conferences will seek ways to create valuable content that fill the limited remaining prime viewership slots left unoccupied by SEC and the BIG. ESPN has already gone all in with the SEC. FOX will go all in with the BIG based on its favorable experience with BIG10 network. NBC will add BIG games as double header to Notre dame games.

The Pac12 and big12 whose contracts expire in a less than 30-48 months will have to find valuable games to fill the remaining slot.

As such, the composition of power conferences remain in flux . The drive to guaranteed P5 slots in the playoffs , especially by the ACC is purely driven by self preservation, due to the conference ‘s inadequate tv deal and potential poaching by the BIG and other conferences.

(03-06-2022 11:50 PM)Acres Wrote:  When the BIG announces their bazillion tv deal this summer , it will trigger another round of expansion, this time by pac12 and Big12 . The conferences will seek ways to create valuable content that fill the limited remaining prime viewership slots left unoccupied by SEC and the BIG. ESPN has already gone all in with the SEC. FOX will go all in with the BIG based on its favorable experience with BIG10 network. NBC will add BIG games as double header to Notre dame games.

The Pac12 and big12 whose contracts expire in a less than 30-48 months will have to find valuable games to fill the remaining slot.

As such, the composition of power conferences remain in flux . The drive to guaranteed P5 slots in the playoffs , especially by the ACC is purely driven by self preservation, due to the conference ‘s inadequate tv deal and potential poaching by the BIG and other conferences.

When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

(03-05-2022 10:08 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(03-05-2022 09:42 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-05-2022 09:07 AM)Cubanbull1 Wrote:  

(03-05-2022 02:07 AM)pesik Wrote:  so i just googled Aresco's most recent interview because of the exit fee thread.. to see if he has talked exit fees recently

and i found this ..Finebaum radio interview from a week ago
https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports-Talk-...=170139025

Aresco just ranting about the playoffs

{im pharaphrasing} says all of it is just BS, there are conferences who don't want the playoff but won't just come out and say it (indirect shot at the acc)
--says acc health claims make zero sense, especially when they are saying "they think it will be resolved at a later date" nothing will have changed at a later date, even if the playoff had to be approved last month, it would start for 2.5 years to prep for the health issues

--says the pac 12 and acc had the most to gain from playoff expansion, that it makes no sense

-- notes the 5+1 thing is mainly a big 10 prerogative.. the pac12 was willing to budge on that (acc doesn't want playoff)

-- something unknown prior- notes the rose bowl was against expansion...they were worried about money

-- think the "NOs" are entrenched in their opinion

Sunbelt Commish
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c...story.html

-- the alliance was unwilling to budge on anything

They will change their tune in next few years. ACC has been fooled by Clemson’s success. A few dry years they’ll be changing their tune.

Plus from a media contract basis the ACC is a dead man walking with their fresh paltry deal until 2036. It's not about basketball anymore and they need to drop the elitist attitude. Their leadership will be the death of them and both the SEC & Big 10 are licking their chops!!

The ACC will look a lot different by the time their contract is over… if mankind is still alive.

(03-07-2022 09:00 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-06-2022 11:50 PM)Acres Wrote:  When the BIG announces their bazillion tv deal this summer , it will trigger another round of expansion, this time by pac12 and Big12 . The conferences will seek ways to create valuable content that fill the limited remaining prime viewership slots left unoccupied by SEC and the BIG. ESPN has already gone all in with the SEC. FOX will go all in with the BIG based on its favorable experience with BIG10 network. NBC will add BIG games as double header to Notre dame games.

The Pac12 and big12 whose contracts expire in a less than 30-48 months will have to find valuable games to fill the remaining slot.

As such, the composition of power conferences remain in flux . The drive to guaranteed P5 slots in the playoffs , especially by the ACC is purely driven by self preservation, due to the conference ‘s inadequate tv deal and potential poaching by the BIG and other conferences.

When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.2

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

Pirate Radio winning this thread with recent references to both The Motels and of course to Zagar and Evans.

Good job Aresco being a *good Pirate* and rocking the boat as always!!!

#HughesCorporation keeping it afloat the most funnest possible way right here on Pirate Radio

(03-07-2022 09:00 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-06-2022 11:50 PM)Acres Wrote:  When the BIG announces their bazillion tv deal this summer , it will trigger another round of expansion, this time by pac12 and Big12 . The conferences will seek ways to create valuable content that fill the limited remaining prime viewership slots left unoccupied by SEC and the BIG. ESPN has already gone all in with the SEC. FOX will go all in with the BIG based on its favorable experience with BIG10 network. NBC will add BIG games as double header to Notre dame games.

The Pac12 and big12 whose contracts expire in a less than 30-48 months will have to find valuable games to fill the remaining slot.

As such, the composition of power conferences remain in flux . The drive to guaranteed P5 slots in the playoffs , especially by the ACC is purely driven by self preservation, due to the conference ‘s inadequate tv deal and potential poaching by the BIG and other conferences.

When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 09:00 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-06-2022 11:50 PM)Acres Wrote:  When the BIG announces their bazillion tv deal this summer , it will trigger another round of expansion, this time by pac12 and Big12 . The conferences will seek ways to create valuable content that fill the limited remaining prime viewership slots left unoccupied by SEC and the BIG. ESPN has already gone all in with the SEC. FOX will go all in with the BIG based on its favorable experience with BIG10 network. NBC will add BIG games as double header to Notre dame games.

The Pac12 and big12 whose contracts expire in a less than 30-48 months will have to find valuable games to fill the remaining slot.

As such, the composition of power conferences remain in flux . The drive to guaranteed P5 slots in the playoffs , especially by the ACC is purely driven by self preservation, due to the conference ‘s inadequate tv deal and potential poaching by the BIG and other conferences.

When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 09:00 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-06-2022 11:50 PM)Acres Wrote:  When the BIG announces their bazillion tv deal this summer , it will trigger another round of expansion, this time by pac12 and Big12 . The conferences will seek ways to create valuable content that fill the limited remaining prime viewership slots left unoccupied by SEC and the BIG. ESPN has already gone all in with the SEC. FOX will go all in with the BIG based on its favorable experience with BIG10 network. NBC will add BIG games as double header to Notre dame games.

The Pac12 and big12 whose contracts expire in a less than 30-48 months will have to find valuable games to fill the remaining slot.

As such, the composition of power conferences remain in flux . The drive to guaranteed P5 slots in the playoffs , especially by the ACC is purely driven by self preservation, due to the conference ‘s inadequate tv deal and potential poaching by the BIG and other conferences.

When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

(03-08-2022 10:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 09:00 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-06-2022 11:50 PM)Acres Wrote:  When the BIG announces their bazillion tv deal this summer , it will trigger another round of expansion, this time by pac12 and Big12 . The conferences will seek ways to create valuable content that fill the limited remaining prime viewership slots left unoccupied by SEC and the BIG. ESPN has already gone all in with the SEC. FOX will go all in with the BIG based on its favorable experience with BIG10 network. NBC will add BIG games as double header to Notre dame games.

The Pac12 and big12 whose contracts expire in a less than 30-48 months will have to find valuable games to fill the remaining slot.

As such, the composition of power conferences remain in flux . The drive to guaranteed P5 slots in the playoffs , especially by the ACC is purely driven by self preservation, due to the conference ‘s inadequate tv deal and potential poaching by the BIG and other conferences.

When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

I don't disagree with you and I wasn't disagreeing originally. Just a different choice of words.

You have to admit there is a financial benefit increasing your programs advantages from a cast system that widen's the gap. I'm not complaining just calling it what it is. There's a gap being created amongst the P5 right now. I'm actually pulling for it because I think the sport can benefit from a breakaway and a different playoff system.

East Carolina has played football since 1932. We've always been underfunded especially within our state both on the University Side and Athletics. There is a huge cast system chocking out opportunity for growth. It's the way NC schools and the ACC like it. The good news is some key wealthy alumni are becoming involved because our university is the economic engine for our region of the state. It's amazing what we've been able to do with the resources we have. More with less achievement. We've been on the threshold of something bigger, but the BCS (cast system) set our program back. I say this not to complain, but as a prime example of a cast systems financial affects. It's not that we haven't worked hard enough that's for sure.

(03-08-2022 10:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 09:00 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-06-2022 11:50 PM)Acres Wrote:  When the BIG announces their bazillion tv deal this summer , it will trigger another round of expansion, this time by pac12 and Big12 . The conferences will seek ways to create valuable content that fill the limited remaining prime viewership slots left unoccupied by SEC and the BIG. ESPN has already gone all in with the SEC. FOX will go all in with the BIG based on its favorable experience with BIG10 network. NBC will add BIG games as double header to Notre dame games.

The Pac12 and big12 whose contracts expire in a less than 30-48 months will have to find valuable games to fill the remaining slot.

As such, the composition of power conferences remain in flux . The drive to guaranteed P5 slots in the playoffs , especially by the ACC is purely driven by self preservation, due to the conference ‘s inadequate tv deal and potential poaching by the BIG and other conferences.

When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

Siding with Quo on this one.

(03-08-2022 02:09 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 10:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 09:00 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

I don't disagree with you and I wasn't disagreeing originally. Just a different choice of words.

You have to admit there is a financial benefit increasing your programs advantages from a cast system that widen's the gap. I'm not complaining just calling it what it is. There's a gap being created amongst the P5 right now. I'm actually pulling for it because I think the sport can benefit from a breakaway and a different playoff system.

East Carolina has played football since 1932. We've always been underfunded especially within our state both on the University Side and Athletics. There is a huge cast system chocking out opportunity for growth. It's the way NC schools and the ACC like it. The good news is some key wealthy alumni are becoming involved because our university is the economic engine for our region of the state. It's amazing what we've been able to do with the resources we have. More with less achievement. We've been on the threshold of something bigger, but the BCS (cast system) set our program back. I say this not to complain, but as a prime example of a cast systems financial affects. It's not that we haven't worked hard enough that's for sure.

caste

Caste system.

(03-08-2022 05:25 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 02:09 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 10:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

I don't disagree with you and I wasn't disagreeing originally. Just a different choice of words.

You have to admit there is a financial benefit increasing your programs advantages from a cast system that widen's the gap. I'm not complaining just calling it what it is. There's a gap being created amongst the P5 right now. I'm actually pulling for it because I think the sport can benefit from a breakaway and a different playoff system.

East Carolina has played football since 1932. We've always been underfunded especially within our state both on the University Side and Athletics. There is a huge cast system chocking out opportunity for growth. It's the way NC schools and the ACC like it. The good news is some key wealthy alumni are becoming involved because our university is the economic engine for our region of the state. It's amazing what we've been able to do with the resources we have. More with less achievement. We've been on the threshold of something bigger, but the BCS (cast system) set our program back. I say this not to complain, but as a prime example of a cast systems financial affects. It's not that we haven't worked hard enough that's for sure.

caste

Caste system.

Defines the current state of college sport perfectly. Thank you!

(03-08-2022 05:25 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 02:09 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 10:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

I don't disagree with you and I wasn't disagreeing originally. Just a different choice of words.

You have to admit there is a financial benefit increasing your programs advantages from a cast system that widen's the gap. I'm not complaining just calling it what it is. There's a gap being created amongst the P5 right now. I'm actually pulling for it because I think the sport can benefit from a breakaway and a different playoff system.

East Carolina has played football since 1932. We've always been underfunded especially within our state both on the University Side and Athletics. There is a huge cast system chocking out opportunity for growth. It's the way NC schools and the ACC like it. The good news is some key wealthy alumni are becoming involved because our university is the economic engine for our region of the state. It's amazing what we've been able to do with the resources we have. More with less achievement. We've been on the threshold of something bigger, but the BCS (cast system) set our program back. I say this not to complain, but as a prime example of a cast systems financial affects. It's not that we haven't worked hard enough that's for sure.

caste

Caste system.

It’s the same way in basketball with the NET ranking system favoring the haves.

Like I say, you can cast your NET but all you’ll hear is a cacophony of castinets.

And, now, let’s all get down to My Green Tambourine here on #PirateRadio

(03-08-2022 02:09 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 10:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 09:00 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

I don't disagree with you and I wasn't disagreeing originally. Just a different choice of words.

You have to admit there is a financial benefit increasing your programs advantages from a cast system that widen's the gap. I'm not complaining just calling it what it is. There's a gap being created amongst the P5 right now. I'm actually pulling for it because I think the sport can benefit from a breakaway and a different playoff system.

East Carolina has played football since 1932. We've always been underfunded especially within our state both on the University Side and Athletics. There is a huge cast system chocking out opportunity for growth. It's the way NC schools and the ACC like it. The good news is some key wealthy alumni are becoming involved because our university is the economic engine for our region of the state. It's amazing what we've been able to do with the resources we have. More with less achievement. We've been on the threshold of something bigger, but the BCS (cast system) set our program back. I say this not to complain, but as a prime example of a cast systems financial affects. It's not that we haven't worked hard enough that's for sure.

One of the great things about the U.S.A. - one of the things we are proudest about as Americans is the idea that "all men are created equal," and that ours is a nation where anyone can get to the top if they work hard enough.

It's known as "the American dream."

Wherever there is inequality of opportunity, it is a stain on our system.

When wealthy criminals walk while the rest are imprisoned, it is a stain on our justice system.

When some deserving individuals are unable to afford a college education, it is a stain on our educational system.

When some are unable to receive medical care, or prescription drugs, it's a stain on our health care system.

When some are unable to afford the cost of housing, it is a stain on our economic system.

In the same way, the BCS and the current CFP are a stain on FBS football because they have not given all FBS teams an equal opportunity to compete for a national championship. The system that exists is rigged. It is a type of caste system.

That's why there is a movement to expand the CFP. Pirate Rep has a legit point.

.

(03-08-2022 05:25 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 02:09 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 10:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

I don't disagree with you and I wasn't disagreeing originally. Just a different choice of words.

You have to admit there is a financial benefit increasing your programs advantages from a cast system that widen's the gap. I'm not complaining just calling it what it is. There's a gap being created amongst the P5 right now. I'm actually pulling for it because I think the sport can benefit from a breakaway and a different playoff system.

East Carolina has played football since 1932. We've always been underfunded especially within our state both on the University Side and Athletics. There is a huge cast system chocking out opportunity for growth. It's the way NC schools and the ACC like it. The good news is some key wealthy alumni are becoming involved because our university is the economic engine for our region of the state. It's amazing what we've been able to do with the resources we have. More with less achievement. We've been on the threshold of something bigger, but the BCS (cast system) set our program back. I say this not to complain, but as a prime example of a cast systems financial affects. It's not that we haven't worked hard enough that's for sure.

caste

Caste system.

I've been saying it for years. People wake up. Vote for human beings.

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 09:00 AM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-06-2022 11:50 PM)Acres Wrote:  When the BIG announces their bazillion tv deal this summer , it will trigger another round of expansion, this time by pac12 and Big12 . The conferences will seek ways to create valuable content that fill the limited remaining prime viewership slots left unoccupied by SEC and the BIG. ESPN has already gone all in with the SEC. FOX will go all in with the BIG based on its favorable experience with BIG10 network. NBC will add BIG games as double header to Notre dame games.

The Pac12 and big12 whose contracts expire in a less than 30-48 months will have to find valuable games to fill the remaining slot.

As such, the composition of power conferences remain in flux . The drive to guaranteed P5 slots in the playoffs , especially by the ACC is purely driven by self preservation, due to the conference ‘s inadequate tv deal and potential poaching by the BIG and other conferences.

When the Big Ten and SEC go over the $1B media right's threshold it's over for the P5. They will suck up a lot of the resources. You can take the L off of Lover because it's over. They should take a few more teams and go off by themselves. I watch none of their football in the first place.

The Gap is created and no way other conferences can ever compete with their numbers. It's sad for tradition, but it's what TV has done to college sports. I'm hoping for a complete break because it is what it is. The left overs can have a valuable product with a good competition based playoff system that can thrive.

I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

Oh, give us an effing break. The SEC is "more valuable" because the sports media has been telling the public it has been more valuable for years. You know as well as I the media has picked the winners and the losers. Just like they do in politics. Just like they do in everything.

(03-09-2022 12:16 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 02:09 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 10:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'm not sure TV has done anything to college sports. TV is a reflection of market value. The B1G and SEC are getting more because their schools are more valuable in the market, they have more fans and thus draw more sponsors and interest from TV.

And this isn't really anything new. For example, in 1978, the Big 10's average football attendance was 61,000 per game. The ACC's was 38,000 per game, the PAC's was 45,000 per game.

It's just that in the past, there were various regimes in place that suppressed those differences in value from being realized, which IMO was not a good thing.

It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

I don't disagree with you and I wasn't disagreeing originally. Just a different choice of words.

You have to admit there is a financial benefit increasing your programs advantages from a cast system that widen's the gap. I'm not complaining just calling it what it is. There's a gap being created amongst the P5 right now. I'm actually pulling for it because I think the sport can benefit from a breakaway and a different playoff system.

East Carolina has played football since 1932. We've always been underfunded especially within our state both on the University Side and Athletics. There is a huge cast system chocking out opportunity for growth. It's the way NC schools and the ACC like it. The good news is some key wealthy alumni are becoming involved because our university is the economic engine for our region of the state. It's amazing what we've been able to do with the resources we have. More with less achievement. We've been on the threshold of something bigger, but the BCS (cast system) set our program back. I say this not to complain, but as a prime example of a cast systems financial affects. It's not that we haven't worked hard enough that's for sure.

One of the great things about the U.S.A. - one of the things we are proudest about as Americans is the idea that "all men are created equal," and that ours is a nation where anyone can get to the top if they work hard enough.

It's known as "the American dream."

Wherever there is inequality of opportunity, it is a stain on our system.

When wealthy criminals walk while the rest are imprisoned, it is a stain on our justice system.

When some deserving individuals are unable to afford a college education, it is a stain on our educational system.

When some are unable to receive medical care, or prescription drugs, it's a stain on our health care system.

When some are unable to afford the cost of housing, it is a stain on our economic system.

In the same way, the BCS and the current CFP are a stain on FBS football because they have not given all FBS teams an equal opportunity to compete for a national championship. The system that exists is rigged. It is a type of caste system.

That's why there is a movement to expand the CFP. Pirate Rep has a legit point.

.

This response is some liberalist, leftist, communist bull5hite. All of those things are not rights. They are businesses who make money. If you want healthcare, pay for it. If you want housing, pay for it. If you want a college education, PAY FOR IT. Lord knows, anybody who wants to go to college can either afford it out of pocket, or the government will GLADLY supply you with a financial package to get it.

What makes the current "playoff system" different from all that is, the current system is equivalent to "black and brown people need not apply". Something that has been outlawed in this country for pretty much our entire lives and beyond.

(03-09-2022 02:47 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(03-09-2022 12:16 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 02:09 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 10:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-07-2022 12:04 PM)Pirate Rep Wrote:  It's all good and say it however you wish. The cast system has been in play for a long time. That grew the interest of the haves base.

At this point I see the need to move on for a better system. The split in my opinion simplifies governance so good decisions for college sports can be considered resulting in a better product for all.

Eh, schools at the top weren't given any kind of status, they earned it. E.g., if you visit LSU's Tiger Stadium, you can see the layers of growth over the years, like the rings on a large tree. When it opened 98 years ago, its capacity was 12,000. And before that, for 30 years, they played at a place called "State Field", which was basically a field with high-school bleachers between the 20 yard lines and standing room around the end zones. Capacity was less than 3,000. But they grew the program.

Also, many schools that complain about a caste system weren't even around for much of it. E.g., my USF didn't have a football program until 1997, so who are we to complain about how CFB grew and was structured before then? We're new to the party.

Most importantly, college football is still a local sport. Local fan support is the basis for any program, and what happens nationally in terms of media deals and bowl access and the like the doesn't have to impact that. E.g., even at a place like Alabama, awash in SEC riches, they generate far more money locally than from SEC sources.

Bottom line is, the status of your football program is in your own hands. If USF fans would show up 60,000 strong to all our games, we'd be in the Big 12 right now. But we don't, because we just don't support the program at that level.

There's always an excuse - the stadium isn't on campus, don't like playing AAC teams, don't like watching the team lose, etc.

Which really means the school has fair-weather fans, only support the program under certain circumstances. IMO, you (we) then get what we deserve. But we want to blame the SEC and B1G for it.

Just MO.

I don't disagree with you and I wasn't disagreeing originally. Just a different choice of words.

You have to admit there is a financial benefit increasing your programs advantages from a cast system that widen's the gap. I'm not complaining just calling it what it is. There's a gap being created amongst the P5 right now. I'm actually pulling for it because I think the sport can benefit from a breakaway and a different playoff system.

East Carolina has played football since 1932. We've always been underfunded especially within our state both on the University Side and Athletics. There is a huge cast system chocking out opportunity for growth. It's the way NC schools and the ACC like it. The good news is some key wealthy alumni are becoming involved because our university is the economic engine for our region of the state. It's amazing what we've been able to do with the resources we have. More with less achievement. We've been on the threshold of something bigger, but the BCS (cast system) set our program back. I say this not to complain, but as a prime example of a cast systems financial affects. It's not that we haven't worked hard enough that's for sure.

One of the great things about the U.S.A. - one of the things we are proudest about as Americans is the idea that "all men are created equal," and that ours is a nation where anyone can get to the top if they work hard enough.

It's known as "the American dream."

Wherever there is inequality of opportunity, it is a stain on our system.

When wealthy criminals walk while the rest are imprisoned, it is a stain on our justice system.

When some deserving individuals are unable to afford a college education, it is a stain on our educational system.

When some are unable to receive medical care, or prescription drugs, it's a stain on our health care system.

When some are unable to afford the cost of housing, it is a stain on our economic system.

In the same way, the BCS and the current CFP are a stain on FBS football because they have not given all FBS teams an equal opportunity to compete for a national championship. The system that exists is rigged. It is a type of caste system.

That's why there is a movement to expand the CFP. Pirate Rep has a legit point.

.

This response is some liberalist, leftist, communist bull5hite. All of those things are not rights. They are businesses who make money. If you want healthcare, pay for it. If you want housing, pay for it. If you want a college education, PAY FOR IT. Lord knows, anybody who wants to go to college can either afford it out of pocket, or the government will GLADLY supply you with a financial package to get it.

What makes the current "playoff system" different from all that is, the current system is equivalent to "black and brown people need not apply". Something that has been outlawed in this country for pretty much our entire lives and beyond.

Well, Cincy did in fact make the playoffs last year.

IMO, the CFP has never gotten the playoffs wrong. It's a small playoff, four teams, so you're always going to have a lot of good teams left out. Good teams from all conferences, not just the G5. I would bet that in every single year of the CFP, the "most deserving team left out" has been a P5 team, never a G5 team. The P5 just have better teams than the G5, especially at the top.

That said, I agree with you about the other post replying to "Milwaukee". Equal opportunity means you aren't discriminated against as per the civil rights laws. It doesn't mean I get to afford the same health care and education that Lebron James has. In the USA, if you earn wealth, then you can buy access to things others cannot. Nothing wrong with that, IMO.

Pretty much agree