Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues

The Alabaster Yak said:
Yeah sounds like Cal, Stanford and SMU going to the ACC. Another conference pulling a G5 program in a talent rich area into a P4 conference for no reason, and a very wealthy G5 program at that. One more mouth to feed in recruiting.

Also, neither ESPN or Fox cared to pull together $31m/school for the Pac 10, and all of the sudden 8 of the 10 members are about to get paid that much by those two networks anyways.

Realignment is stupid. The adults in charge of all the different entities involved have failed.
Click to expand...
But ESPN did offer the PAC10 $30 Million per year each and some college professor said they should get 50 so they turned it down - that $30 million went to the Big12 with a provision to pay additional P5 schools a pro rata share up to 4 schools - so the money was there. The B1G got Oregon and Washington at Bargain Basement prices. And it appears only 6 of the 10 are getting that because it appears Cal and Stanford are going to get very little.

I agree, Cal, Stanford and SMU going to the ACC makes little sense, I also will be surprised if it happens.
 
At this point, I'm in favor of one top level college league of somewhere north of 48 teams. One base contract with escalators depending on how often you are selected for main broadcast, the ratings you get and the streaming subs you deliver. Then group teams into regional divisions similar to how this all looked 30ish years ago to get regionality back.
 
Buffnik said:
At this point, I'm in favor of one top level college league of somewhere north of 48 teams. One base contract with escalators depending on how often you are selected for main broadcast, the ratings you get and the streaming subs you deliver. Then group teams into regional divisions similar to how this all looked 30ish years ago to get regionality back.
Click to expand...
i agree it would likely lead to a better outcome for fans, and maybe for the schools.

but, what's the short or medium-term benefit to the SEC and B1G to give up what they now have?
 
Buffnik said:
At this point, I'm in favor of one top level college league of somewhere north of 48 teams. One base contract with escalators depending on how often you are selected for main broadcast, the ratings you get and the streaming subs you deliver. Then group teams into regional divisions similar to how this all looked 30ish years ago to get regionality back.
Click to expand...
Simple. Clean. Good idea. Id add greater share of NY6 and CFP revenues based on performance.
 
Buffnik said:
It's got to be an end game of turning CFB and CBB into sports leagues under network control with NFL & NBA operating structures.

I bet we next see realignment related to CBB. They'll make it so the Big East expands into a national conference by poaching the most valuable properties (VCU, Gonzaga, Dayton, St. Louis, others).
Click to expand...
For me, college football and athletics is about rivalries and that aspect of it is either being killed or greatly altered. But I’m an old man, set in my ways and living in the past! Sis boom ba!!
 
If Stanford, SMU, & Cal go to the ACC 2024 conference numbers are:

SEC - 16 teams
ACC - 17 teams (18 with ND)
B1G - 18 teams
XII -16 teams

So Power football will consist of 68 teams, same number as the NCAA tournament.

Seems like this set up would allow for a reversion back to a 4 team playoff, where conferences have structure to determine their champion, and each league sends their champ to the playoff.
 
Buff_since76 said:
If Stanford, SMU, & Cal go to the ACC 2024 conference numbers are:

SEC - 16 teams
ACC - 17 teams (18 with ND)
B1G - 18 teams
XII -16 teams

So Power football will consist of 68 teams, same number as the NCAA tournament.

Seems like this set up would allow for a reversion back to a 4 team playoff, where conferences have structure to determine their champion, and each league sends their champ to the playoff.
Click to expand...

No way in hell this reverts back to a four-team playoff.
 
Buff_since76 said:
If Stanford, SMU, & Cal go to the ACC 2024 conference numbers are:

SEC - 16 teams
ACC - 17 teams (18 with ND)
B1G - 18 teams
XII -16 teams

So Power football will consist of 68 teams, same number as the NCAA tournament.

Seems like this set up would allow for a reversion back to a 4 team playoff, where conferences have structure to determine their champion, and each league sends their champ to the playoff.
Click to expand...
I can’t see the SEC and Big Ten approving of a playoff that only allows them one share of playoff money. I’m sure they would demand 8 teams so they could get two or even three teams in every year.
 
Buff_since76 said:
If Stanford, SMU, & Cal go to the ACC 2024 conference numbers are:

SEC - 16 teams
ACC - 17 teams (18 with ND)
B1G - 18 teams
XII -16 teams

So Power football will consist of 68 teams, same number as the NCAA tournament.

Seems like this set up would allow for a reversion back to a 4 team playoff, where conferences have structure to determine their champion, and each league sends their champ to the playoff.
Click to expand...
Too many.
 
Buffnik said:
At this point, I'm in favor of one top level college league of somewhere north of 48 teams. One base contract with escalators depending on how often you are selected for main broadcast, the ratings you get and the streaming subs you deliver. Then group teams into regional divisions similar to how this all looked 30ish years ago to get regionality back.
Click to expand...
I just don't see how this is feasible in both the college level or in the professional ranks.

There's a reason the biggest sports league you can find is 32 teams. At least with 16 game regular seasons they play a good chunk of the other teams in the league. With a 48 team league and a 12 game regular season schedule, how many teams would we have that have 8/9 wins but have few common opponents? The difficulty in getting a playoff put together would be extremely high. I don't see it being feasible. I think it would have to be split into two leagues of 24 and even then would likely need a 16 team playoff to be fair.
 
Bread said:
I just don't see how this is feasible in both the college level or in the professional ranks.

There's a reason the biggest sports league you can find is 32 teams. At least with 16 game regular seasons they play a good chunk of the other teams in the league. With a 48 team league and a 12 game regular season schedule, how many teams would we have that have 8/9 wins but have few common opponents? The difficulty in getting a playoff put together would be extremely high. I don't see it being feasible. I think it would have to be split into two leagues of 24 and even then would likely need a 16 team playoff to be fair.
Click to expand...
I have no interest in playing teams regularly other than regional rivals. The rest we can meet every so often as a non-divisional game or in the playoffs.
 
Bread said:
I just don't see how this is feasible in both the college level or in the professional ranks.

There's a reason the biggest sports league you can find is 32 teams. At least with 16 game regular seasons they play a good chunk of the other teams in the league. With a 48 team league and a 12 game regular season schedule, how many teams would we have that have 8/9 wins but have few common opponents? The difficulty in getting a playoff put together would be extremely high. I don't see it being feasible. I think it would have to be split into two leagues of 24 and even then would likely need a 16 team playoff to be fair.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t the nfl play their division partners twice per year?
 
Last edited:
Buffnik said:
I have no interest in playing teams regularly other than regional rivals. The rest we can meet every so often as a non-divisional game or in the playoffs.
Click to expand...
I agree, but then how can you have a barometer of a teams ability when you don't have any or very few common opponents among the other top teams?
 
PhillyBuff said:
Is that a serious question?:unsure: :giggle: :giggle:
Click to expand...
Not really. It was rhetorical. I was making a point about how a 32 team league playing 16 games gets to have a bigger variety of opponents / play more members of the league per year. If you play 4 teams twice in that 16 game schedule, I think it’s a wash at best, and probably less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top