I have stated many times, as well as several others, that loading up on the bigger names into superconferences only pushes down the present middle of the pack to to cellar dwellers. Conference play is a zero sum gain regardless of how you expand, total wins always equals total losses. Sure, right now conference can get 3-4 wins in OOC games, but that is less impressive when you have to face CFB's equivalent of Murderer's Row in conference.
The SEC has Alabama, Georgia, LSU (traditional powers - mostly consistent winners, then add in OU and UT), with Florida, Tennessee, Auburn (resurgent powers, good with flashes of greatness, now add in TAMU), followed by Ole Miss, Mississippi St., Arkansas, USC-East, the solid middle of the pack, and Mizzou for good measure) and closing out with UK and Vandy (bottom feeders, cellar dwellers, punching bags). Yes, any team can step up in any given season and any team can fall in any given season; regardless, the wins equals the losses. If it weren't for the 4 OOC games, the bottom half will rarely see a 6-6 or better season. With the new powerhouses being added, within the conference play, there will be a slew of losers. Take away the OOC games and the SEC is screwed. Royally screwed.
The Big has been ruled historically by UM and tOSU; they added PSU and Nebraska, historically great schools (traditional powers, now add in USC-West, not the fake one in Jersey, we'll see them shortly); followed by Wiscy, Iowa State, MSU, and Maryland (resurgent powers, add in UCLA); then Minny Purdue, Northwestern (the solid middle of the pack, closing out with Indiana, Illinois, and Rutgers (bottom feeders, cellar dwellers, punching bags). Again, any team can step up in any given season and any given team can fall in any given season; nevertheless, wins always equals the losses. Like the SEC, if not for the 3 OOC games, the bottom rarely ever sees a 6-6 or better season.
The result is that the superconference idea only works under two methods: First; if there is a pool of teams to "build-up" the superconferences to appear as the "real" powers. Second; if the superconferences break away and form a semi-pro league. Each option has issues.
In the first, the superconferences can never ditch the pool of teams to beat up on. To do this, there must be middle of teh pack conferences and bottom feeder conferences. CFB remains a zero sum gain no matter how many teams play and how many conferences are in play, wins will equal losses. At least everyone has an imaginary shot at the playoffs and title
In the second; the the picture becomes bleak. If the two (or three) superconfernces break away, they no longer have the other conferences to beat up on and the above reviews of the conferences becomes much more balanced. Former top teams will fall to the middle, the middle falls to the bottom. Fans stop being diehards when their team is a punching bag. Sure, the fans may follow their team but less attendance, less interest in other games, and less merchandise purchased. Further, fans of other conference are more likely to follow their team in the "old" NCAA D1 which no longer play with the superconferences. Less interest from these fans to follow the superconferences. We have an NFL as it is, a minor league for teh NFL pretending to be college teams is basically nonsense. Sure a few teams will be happy but overall the ratings are down.
- To be sure, the superconferences could expand (larger conferences or add one superconference or two) sufficiently to ensure more bottom feeders, but internet talking heads have already deemed this is impossible. (What's impossible is that these same internet talking heads then project the two superconferences at 20, 24, and 28 teams, but ignore the fact they they undercut their own opinions that the the expansion is impossible, they have deemed it so).
So what do the ACC, Big 12, and PAC12 do? I, as well as several others, have stated and alluded to this dilemma faced by the SEC and B1G; hopefully I can do a better job explaining the matter than previously.
Knowing that 32 teams is simply insufficient for a breakaway league to hold CFB fans, the two superconferences will have to expand or allow other conferences to stay in the game. Fans are loyal to their respective teams, cutting "my school" out of the semi-pro league will make fans stay fans of the present-soon-to-be-lower division. The present ACC, Big12 and Pac12 teams should sit tight. Let the the superconferences beat themselves up over several years. The Big12 and the PAC12 will have new conference leaders. The ACC will likely have FSU and Clemson or other leaders. When Alabama is brought down to earth after Saban retires, OU and UT are meh teams (yes, I have no clue which teams will be in power in 10+ years), and the former solid middle teams are bottom feeders, there will be a shift in power.
If the super conferences want to expand now (within the next few years) with ACC teams, they have to provide a soft landing for 14 teams...and placate ND and ESPN. Each is an Hercuean task in itself, combine the three together and, yo are in miracle territory. There is no incentive to dissolve a conference when their is no landing place guaranteed for anyone let alone the other teams necessary to dissolve the ACC. Meanwhile, ND and ESPN still hold sway, along with the remaining ACC teams that the internet talking heads have deemed have no hope at life in CFBdom. Why would ND vote for anything that upsets their apple cart? Why would the remaining ACC teams vote for anything against their self interest? (Recall the alleged leaving teams are acting in their self interest) Why would ESPN blow up it's profitable property unless they can make more money? Presently, the ACC teams individually align with the ACC as a whole, ND, and ESPN.
The ACC has 13 seasons left together. The ACC schools should buy popcorn and watch the SEC and B1G settle the superconference winners and losers battles with the big names. In 13 years, the landscape will change significantly. The ACC will look much better and more stable as the others are infighting, backbiting, and wondering why the left their conference for this ^&%#&^%! They could still be King of the Hill if they weren't so arrogant and greedy.
We haven't even considered hoops. If the SEC and B1G split off, they will lose a lot of cash. They cannot afford to leave the Div. 1 group in hoops. Nobody wants to watch NBA lite (see the G-league. Who cares about the G-league unless there is a player or two you are pulling for?) Much of the present media deals are predicated on significant hoops revenue. You cannot take 32 teams out of 320 and say they are elite and will take all the revenue. NCAA hoops is built more on the loyalty fans to their school than CFB. Sure, they could sway the Big East and maybe another super hoops conference to join them, but again, not sufficient teams to sway the masses to give up their respective loyalties. Let's be honest, they still don't have sufficient teams to furnish a Field of Sixty-Four, even with the worst teams in their conferences.
Once the non-superconferences realize they hold power by not playing the superconferences, the money will have to shift to the lower conferences. Either in better deals for the lower conferences or in higher priced body-bag games. Even then, fans are will not be impressed is tOSU beats up on Florida Atlantic! We can probably expect disdain for the superconferences if they play and beat up the lowly unwashed teams of CFB.
Time is as much the ACC's friend as it is their enemy.
For SU, Time is probably more of a friend. SU is on the right trajectory. Will Dino be the HC in 12 years? Only if he wins. The Board and Admin are behind SU Sports (don't believe all of the NIL drama. I have no insight, but knowing that SU avoided overpaying for Jesse Edwards (of whom I am a fan) shows me they are handling the business side within their abilities and they are not panicking.
Take a deep breath, slowly exhale, watch the next 13 years and enjoy. While I think SU will be fine, I am staying with SU even if they are relegated to the non-semi-pro league. At least SU is staying on mission: Education of young adults to become leaders of the future.
