That would be 134 schools, more than enough IMO to avoid many anti-trust issues. They could all remain in the NCAA for everything else, including basketball.

I could envision establishing a new entity that acts as the single collective bargaining agent for the schools in negotiating with a Players Association. This entity would be responsible for rules governing roster sizes; length of season; rules of play; hiring, supervising and training of officials; transfers; NIL; and recruiting, among other things.

My concept for a CBA would be for an entity wide minimum salary for all scholarship athletes, but leaving decisions about compensation above the minimum to the schools and/or their respective conferences. All scholarships would include only those education expenses considered non-taxable by the IRS, such as tuition, books, fees, etc. All other costs of attendance, including meals and housing, would be the responsibility of the athlete, covered by his salary. Other elements that would be included in a CBA are limits on practice time (including film study) health insurance/workers' comp, minimum number of classes required for eligibility among other thing to be negotiated.

Taking into account existing conference structures, I see a single 16 team championship tournament, with no post season conference tournaments. I envision a two-tiered hierarchy which recognizes the disparity in resources between the four remaining power conferences and the Group of 5 schools and independents.

I see the SEC and B1G both growing to 24 schools, each organized in three geographically rational 8-team divisions, with the Big XII and ACC ultimately left with 12 teams each and no divisions. The six division champions and two conference champions in the upper tier (8 teams in all) would automatically qualify for the Championship Tournament (CT), and would host the first round games on their home fields played in the first weekend in December.

The G5 and Independents would have two automatic qualifiers in the CT. The first is the highest ranked G5 conference champion (based on combined points in the AP and USA Today polls), and the second would go to the highest ranked non-champion or independent (currently including Notre Dame, Army, UConn and UMass) from the remaining 57 schools (62 G5 - 5 champs), provided that this non-champion is ranked in the Top 20 of the combined polls. If no non-champ is ranked in the Top 20, this bid goes first to the next highest ranked G5 champ if they are in the Top 20, and if there are no such teams, it is added to the six At-large bids that go to the highest ranked P4 teams not already included in the field.

The 8 champions are seed #1-#8 according to their combined poll rank. The remaining 8 teams are seeded #9-#16 and the brackets are organized in the usual manner, with #1 hosting #16, #2 hosting #15 and so on. After the first round, all games are played at neutral sites. First round losers are eligible to play in a bowl game.

In a separate post, I will propose conference makeups for the P4, which will no doubt be met with at least a few hoots of derision, mostly because they would require the B1G to accept a few schools for geographic reasons that are neither AAU nor high value brands.

Listed in order of their 10 year average Sagarin strength rating (new members bold):

SEC East:
Clemson, Florida St, South Carolina, Miami, Virginia Tech, NC State, UNC, Virginia

SEC Central:
Alabama, Georgia, Auburn, Florida, Mississippi St, Tennessee, Kentucky, Vanderbilt

SEC West:
Oklahoma, LSU, Texas A&M, Texas, Ole Miss, Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas

****************************************************************

B1G East:
Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Michigan St, Indiana, Maryland, Purdue, Rutgers

B1G Central:
Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Iowa State, Northwestern, Colorado, Illinois

B1G West:
Oregon, Washington, USC, Stanford, UCLA, Washington St, California, Oregon St

*******************************************************************

Big XII
Oklahoma St, TCU, Kansas St, Utah, Baylor, Arizona St, Texas Tech, BYU, Houston, Arizona, San Diego St, SMU

ACC:
Louisville, West Virginia, Pitt, UCF, Georgia Tech, Memphis, Cincinnati, Duke, Syracuse, Wake Forest, Boston College, USF

Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

They provide a source for body bag games to pad the win totals.

(10-20-2023 11:02 AM)ken d Wrote:  Listed in order of their 10 year average Sagarin strength rating (new members bold):

SEC East:
Clemson, Florida St, South Carolina, Miami, Virginia Tech, NC State, UNC, Virginia

SEC Central:
Alabama, Georgia, Auburn, Florida, Mississippi St, Tennessee, Kentucky, Vanderbilt

SEC West:
Oklahoma, LSU, Texas A&M, Texas, Ole Miss, Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas

****************************************************************

B1G East:
Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Michigan St, Indiana, Maryland, Purdue, Rutgers

B1G Central:
Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Iowa State, Northwestern, Colorado, Illinois

B1G West:
Oregon, Washington, USC, Stanford, UCLA, Washington St, California, Oregon St

*******************************************************************

Big XII
Oklahoma St, TCU, Kansas St, Utah, Baylor, Arizona St, Texas Tech, BYU, Houston, Arizona, San Diego St, SMU

ACC:
Louisville, West Virginia, Pitt, UCF, Georgia Tech, Memphis, Cincinnati, Duke, Syracuse, Wake Forest, Boston College, USF

All of those schools would be academically acceptable to the B1G in a scenario like this. Iowa St was AAU up until a decade ago, and WSU and OSU were in the Pac for 100 years. The real issue with your plan is that the B1G wouldn't take those 3 and would instead add UArizona, ASU, and Utah, not only for Academic but also for Athletic reasons.

(10-20-2023 11:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

They provide a source for body bag games to pad the win totals.

The key to any sort of football breakaway is kind of the same as breaking up a Conference; if everybody wins, then the courts and Congress don't get involved. If half the Country loses their "FBS" team, that could actually spur Congress to DO SOMETHING, and that something would probably not be a good thing for the P2. Also, the g5 do an outstanding job of keeping football relevant and interesting in parts of the country that aren't ready yet to support a P4 program. Today, most of our stud athletes come from just a few regions: the SE, SW, and SoCal. It might not be ideal for the SEC if more 4*/5* studs come out of the NE, West, Mid Atlantic or Midwest in the future, but it would be great for football as a whole. A rising tide lifts all boats, and it could serve as a sort of insurance policy for the big schools today to help ensure that our football remains relevant into the distant future.

(10-20-2023 11:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

They provide a source for body bag games to pad the win totals.

The future of P2 football won't need win totals. If your team goes 8-6 in divisional play and can still go to the playoff (think "wild card") you don't need Georgia State or Rice coming along.

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

Why would the Big Ten and SEC want any schools alongside them? Think NFL with the NFC and AFC.

(10-20-2023 11:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

They provide a source for body bag games to pad the win totals.

Who provides such games in the NFL or CFL?

Remember: SEC Commish Sankey recently scoffed at North Texas' $37M athletic budget. If the P2 (3, 4) bolt, it's an 'ante' (a budget) of more than that to be in the exclusive club.

(10-20-2023 12:05 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

They provide a source for body bag games to pad the win totals.

The future of P2 football won't need win totals. If your team goes 8-6 in divisional play and can still go to the playoff (think "wild card") you don't need Georgia State or Rice coming along.

bryanw1995 gave a much better reason. I was being flippant.

(10-20-2023 11:39 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

They provide a source for body bag games to pad the win totals.

The key to any sort of football breakaway is kind of the same as breaking up a Conference; if everybody wins, then the courts and Congress don't get involved. If half the Country loses their "FBS" team, that could actually spur Congress to DO SOMETHING, and that something would probably not be a good thing for the P2. Also, the g5 do an outstanding job of keeping football relevant and interesting in parts of the country that aren't ready yet to support a P4 program. Today, most of our stud athletes come from just a few regions: the SE, SW, and SoCal. It might not be ideal for the SEC if more 4*/5* studs come out of the NE, West, Mid Atlantic or Midwest in the future, but it would be great for football as a whole. A rising tide lifts all boats, and it could serve as a sort of insurance policy for the big schools today to help ensure that our football remains relevant into the distant future.

Half the country won't lose an FBS team; they'll be left behind and have the FBS label. The P2 (or 3 or 4) will have their own sandbox, no different than FBS/FCS today.

(10-20-2023 12:12 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

Why would the Big Ten and SEC want any schools alongside them? Think NFL with the NFC and AFC.

Why do we have to be just like the NFL? I would argue that much of the strength of American Football is that people everywhere can play it at a very high level, and most g5, even some FCS schools get to play in front of 100k fans every now and then.

(10-20-2023 12:19 PM)The Sicatoka Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:39 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

They provide a source for body bag games to pad the win totals.

The key to any sort of football breakaway is kind of the same as breaking up a Conference; if everybody wins, then the courts and Congress don't get involved. If half the Country loses their "FBS" team, that could actually spur Congress to DO SOMETHING, and that something would probably not be a good thing for the P2. Also, the g5 do an outstanding job of keeping football relevant and interesting in parts of the country that aren't ready yet to support a P4 program. Today, most of our stud athletes come from just a few regions: the SE, SW, and SoCal. It might not be ideal for the SEC if more 4*/5* studs come out of the NE, West, Mid Atlantic or Midwest in the future, but it would be great for football as a whole. A rising tide lifts all boats, and it could serve as a sort of insurance policy for the big schools today to help ensure that our football remains relevant into the distant future.

Half the country won't lose an FBS team; they'll be left behind and have the FBS label. The P2 (or 3 or 4) will have their own sandbox, no different than FBS/FCS today.

How much money/enthusiasm surrounds FCS? The new "breakaway" division will become the only one that matters, as FBS is today. 40 schools, 80, 120, however many end up in this division, will have a lot of important decisions to make. Is it closed? Can old FBS and FCS schools apply for membership? What's the criteria? If someone moves up, does someone else have to move down to maintain the same number of teams like in a promotion/relegation environment? How often is promotion available? Every year? Every decade? Biannually?

The number of teams in the sandbox, assuming there ever is an actual breakaway, will be critical.

There was a vote with the Knight commission that favored breaking FBS football away.

That was OPPOSED by the P5 schools. That sort of breakaway helps the schools who really don't belong in Division I and want to keep milking the big schools for basketball tourney money.

I think the P5 would only support a partial breakaway if it included men's and women's basketball as well. But they probably would prefer all sports separated. The low budget schools are hindering changes the P5 schools want.

I guess it begs the question that I come back to on the subject of a breakaway: what do the P4 (and more specifically the P2) get out of this compared to the CFP structure? It’s one thing if basketball splits off with this breakaway entity, too, but if it’s just football, it seems that the P4 get most of the benefits of a separate organization for football via the CFP already.

The other piece about collectively bargaining solely for football is that it may not comply with Title VII and/or Title IX.

I think a lot of schools are looking the gift horse in the mouth with the current NIL world: they’re getting their most valuable athletes paid at top market values without having to pay any of them directly. No one should be complaining about that system. It all becomes so much messier with direct payments from colleges to athletes (even though I see it as legally inevitable) because it’s not clear as to how much you can pay athletes, whether you can pay football and basketball players differently compared to other sports from a legal perspective, etc. NIL circumvents all of that and acts much closer to a true free market where the most valuable athletes are paid the most in a legal manner (which is how it should be).

The NFL doesn’t need body-bag games b/c their bad teams’ fanbases still sell out their stadiums. There's also lots of parity which makes it easier for teams to turn it around.

There is no parity in college football & that won't change if the P5 breaks away.

A perpetual 1-11 cellar dweller P5 team will kill the teams’ fanbase & be playing in empty stadiums, possibly the program. There's a reason bad teams fold in leagues that aren't the NFL.

(10-20-2023 12:05 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

They provide a source for body bag games to pad the win totals.

The future of P2 football won't need win totals. If your team goes 8-6 in divisional play and can still go to the playoff (think "wild card") you don't need Georgia State or Rice coming along.

It's not just about win totals. It's also about continuing to be able to sell tickets to seven home games per season instead of six. When you average home attendance of 50,000 to 100,000, the extra home game ticket revenue is a nice chunk of change. (Last season, average attendance at SEC games was 76,667 and at Big Ten games was 67,295).

The extra home game also helps keep the fans and boosters happy, especially in northern climes where it offers an additional opportunity to see the team before the weather turns freezing.

A breakaway of just the P2 will bring that to an end. Balanced schedules will be the rule.

(10-20-2023 12:41 PM)bullet Wrote:  There was a vote with the Knight commission that favored breaking FBS football away.

That was OPPOSED by the P5 schools. That sort of breakaway helps the schools who really don't belong in Division I and want to keep milking the big schools for basketball tourney money.

I think the P5 would only support a partial breakaway if it included men's and women's basketball as well. But they probably would prefer all sports separated. The low budget schools are hindering changes the P5 schools want.

Agree. The power schools promote broad based athletic programs (likely 65 of the top 70 points total every year in the Directors Cup are P5 members). The power conferences fully embrace Title IX (it’s perfectly aligned with their members educational mission and diversity goals). Power schools use football and basketball revenue to subsidize scholarships in non-revenue sports.

A breakaway of power schools will never be just about football, because power schools already have administrative and financial control of football.

A breakaway would have to be about the need to spend more on all athletics.

Quote:It's not just about win totals. It's also about continuing to be able to sell tickets to seven home games per season instead of six. When you average home attendance of 50,000 to 100,000, the extra home game ticket revenue is a nice chunk of change. (Last season, average attendance at SEC games was 76,667 and at Big Ten games was 67,295).

The extra home game also helps keep the fans and boosters happy, especially in northern climes where it offers an additional opportunity to see the team before the weather turns freezing.

A breakaway of just the P2 will bring that to an end. Balanced schedules will be the rule.

This spot on. There's a symbiotic relationship here. People talk like the Power schools don't get anything out of having the others attached, but they get *plenty* out of it. They also get nearly whatever they want by the very threat that they could leave. They don't even actually have to do it. It's the proverbial have their cake and eat it too just by floating the idea of leaving.

And of course the G5 goes along with it because even though the system is messed up, they still benefit perception-wise by the association that they are playing at "the same level" as the power schools.

(10-20-2023 12:12 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  

(10-20-2023 11:14 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Why would the P2 want CUSA and the MAC schools alongside them? They don't.

Why would the Big Ten and SEC want any schools alongside them? Think NFL with the NFC and AFC.

Exactly what I was thinking!