Keep this in mind about superconferences...

[Scooch]

If and when a few of them are formed, it means that there will never, ever, ever be a true playoff. At most you may see a +1, but that's it.

So if you want an 8 or 16 team playoff, and believe me that's a remote possibility anyway, you should be rooting against superconferences.

 

[Bayside44]

A plus one is fine.

BTW, good gracious, 87K in Texas last night for a school from Louisiana and a school from Oregon.

 

[rrlbees]

If and when a few of them are formed, it means that there will never, ever, ever be a true playoff. At most you may see a +1, but that's it.

So if you want an 8 or 16 team playoff, and believe me that's a remote possibility anyway, you should be rooting against superconferences.

Why couldn't they have a playoff?

 

[orangephan]

If and when a few of them are formed, it means that there will never, ever, ever be a true playoff. At most you may see a +1, but that's it.

So if you want an 8 or 16 team playoff, and believe me that's a remote possibility anyway, you should be rooting against superconferences.

Maybe a final 4, which nakes sense considering they'll be 4 SCs. I think SU's chances of ever making it to a championship game is slim. I can live with that, plus the traditional bowl games.

 

[Scooch]

Why couldn't they have a playoff?

Not couldn't. Wouldn't.

I'll elaborate...

The exponential difference in media value for conferences between college football and college basketball is due in large part to the value of each sport's post-season. The money committed to the hoops tourney totally sucks the life out of the regular season. Now, keep in mind I'm not talking about this from a competitive standpoint. I'm not one of those yokels who says the hoops season is "meaningless". But from media value standpoint it's value is greatly diminished by the existence of the tourney.

The conference commissioners know this, and do not want to repeat that model for football. We can poke all sorts of holes in the "every game, every week" matters mantra about football. But from a media value standpoint that is absolutely true.

So, in a world where 4 or 5 superconferences are trying to extract every last media dime available, why would they devalue their core product? And that product is their ability to sell regular season rights, and carry those regular season games on their own networks. Once again, this isn't about the money that could be made from a playoff, it's about protecting the money that is critical to be made to ensure the viability of super conferences.

The one hedge is that if 4 super conferences emerge and decide to break away from the NCAA, I suppose they could form an alliance to create a 4-team playoff and share in that money. But there would be soooo many political ramifications of that approach (both in the splitting off and in the creation of a cartel) that I'm not certain we'll see that anytime soon.

 

[Stern]

Never getting a playoff anyway. That is a pipe dream that people still cling to for some unknown reason. It's NEVER gonna happen.

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

Not couldn't. Wouldn't.

I'll elaborate...

The exponential difference in media value for conferences between college football and college basketball is due in large part to the value of each sport's post-season. The money committed to the hoops tourney totally sucks the life out of the regular season. Now, keep in mind I'm not talking about this from a competitive standpoint. I'm not one of those yokels who says the hoops season is "meaningless". But from media value standpoint it's value is greatly diminished by the existence of the tourney.

The conference commissioners know this, and do not want to repeat that model for football. We can poke all sorts of holes in the "every game, every week" matters mantra about football. But from a media value standpoint that is absolutely true.

So, in a world where 4 or 5 superconferences are trying to extract every last media dime available, why would they devalue their core product? And that product is their ability to sell regular season rights, and carry those regular season games on their own networks. Once again, this isn't about the money that could be made from a playoff, it's about protecting the money that is critical to be made to ensure the viability of super conferences.

The one hedge is that if 4 super conferences emerge and decide to break away from the NCAA, I suppose they could form an alliance to create a 4-team playoff and share in that money. But there would be soooo many political ramifications of that approach (both in the splitting off and in the creation of a cartel) that I'm not certain we'll see that anytime soon.

I understand the premise I'm just not completely sure I buy it entirely. If you were to have a 4 or 8 team playoff, that means each team and each game in the regular season would still be incredibly important. Four elite teams (or eight) would have to pretty much run the table to get there, thereby making the regular season still incredibly important.

I get your point (and the point of the universities involved), but I think it's short sighted. This isn't a 68 team field, is is a two or three round playoff which in my mind is much different. If that's how it's viewed I guess you can't change that viewpoint necessarily, but I think it's comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Scooch]

I understand the premise I'm just not completely sure I buy it entirely. If you were to have a 4 or 8 team playoff, that means each team and each game in the regular season would still be incredibly important. Four elite teams (or eight) would have to pretty much run the table to get there, thereby making the regular season still incredibly important.

I get your point (and the point of the universities involved), but I think it's short sighted. This isn't a 68 team field, is is a two or three round playoff which in my mind is much different. If that's how it's viewed I guess you can't change that viewpoint necessarily, but I think it's comparing apples to oranges.

I don't disagree. But there's logic, and there's fear. And the fear that any kind of playoff would take money away from conference rights deals is high. Very high.

I do think someday we'll see a +1, which is a 4 team playoff.

 

[MassOrange]

Superconferences suck.

9 teams is the perfect number for football. 4 home, 4 away, 4 ooc. No divisions. No half-empty championship game.

Sigh.

 

[Dick_in_MI]

If and when a few of them are formed, it means that there will never, ever, ever be a true playoff. At most you may see a +1, but that's it.

So if you want an 8 or 16 team playoff, and believe me that's a remote possibility anyway, you should be rooting against superconferences.

I'm not directly addressing the thread, but I hate the idea of a superconference. We already have a basketball superconference in the BE and it's a bloated mess that nobody likes and which has diluted rivalries.

 

[Alsacs]

If we get 4 super-conferences it will make an obvious playoff system. Even if its a 4 team playoff that is better than what we have now. It would make winning your conference a prerequisite to making the playoffs. Take a look at how many teams that no.3 could have been the national champion. 2000-Miami 3rd 2001- Colorado/Oregon 2002-nobody 2003-USC/LSU/OU 2004- Auburn 2005-Penn St 2006-Boise St 2007-Georgia/USC 2008- Utah 2009- Boise St 2010- TCU all of these teams would get a chance at the title. Give me super-conferences as it will end this circus and provide stability for Syracuse and all other schools.

 

[kyleslamb]

If and when a few of them are formed, it means that there will never, ever, ever be a true playoff. At most you may see a +1, but that's it.

So if you want an 8 or 16 team playoff, and believe me that's a remote possibility anyway, you should be rooting against superconferences.

The groundwork is already being laid for a playoff system.

In fact, it's not been reported any, but there are discussions ongoing in the NCAA about creating three subdivisions for football instead of just two (this comes from a couple friends I have in athletics that receive newsletters and are privy to some discussions).

Now ask yourself: what is the biggest benefit of three subdivisions? Creating a playoff system in the upper division that would not have to cater automatic bids to the middle-tier conferences. By going to three subdivisions, they will then have a football playoff among the four major conferences (or five if the Big East survives in some capacity) and will create nearly a billion in annual revenue--a small percentage of which will be shared among the two lower subdivisions.

Mark my words: a playoff is coming.

 

[Czar]

It's easy to have a playoff.

4 super conferences is basically just 8 conferences with each having a special scheduling agreement with another. You can look at the conference championships as the first step of the playoff.

Then, with the 4 conference champions, a 2 week playoff can be played. Simple.

 

[zibby]

Four conference championship games then two national semi-finals and then a national championship sure sounds like an eight-team playoff to me. I'd prefer a 16-team playoff where non-major conference teams got a chance, but it's approximately a quintillion times better than what we have now.

 

[lvilleorange]

Four conference championship games then two national semi-finals and then a national championship sure sounds like an eight-team playoff to me. I'd prefer a 16-team playoff where non-major conference teams got a chance, but it's approximately a quintillion times better than what we have now.

Agreed. Sounds alot like the NCAA hoops tourney of the 70s.

 

[SaintTristan]

If we get 4 super-conferences it will make an obvious playoff system. Even if its a 4 team playoff that is better than what we have now. It would make winning your conference a prerequisite to making the playoffs. Take a look at how many teams that no.3 could have been the national champion. 2000-Miami 3rd 2001- Colorado/Oregon 2002-nobody 2003-USC/LSU/OU 2004- Auburn 2005-Penn St 2006-Boise St 2007-Georgia/USC 2008- Utah 2009- Boise St 2010- TCU all of these teams would get a chance at the title. Give me super-conferences as it will end this circus and provide stability for Syracuse and all other schools.

It will end the circus, but you kids are crazy if you think that 4 super conferences (acc, SEC, B10, PAC) is guaranteed to include SU. It is 50/50 at best.

 

[jekelish]

One of the "superconferences" will most definitely include SU. It's driven largely by football, yes, but there's no way that one of the biggest hoops programs in the country (with a proud football history) will be left out. No chance in hell. 100% that Syracuse is included in one of those conferences. Put it this way: why would Kansas, for example, be a shoe in over Syracuse? Out of the Big East, the obvious teams that are sure to be included are Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia...and that's about it. MAYBE Louisville. MAYBE UConn based on other sports. MAYBE USF based on where they're located. That's it.

 

[All4SU]

Is the NFL regular seaon rumor Ed by the playoffs? I don't see it.

Not couldn't. Wouldn't.

I'll elaborate...

The exponential difference in media value for conferences between college football and college basketball is due in large part to the value of each sport's post-season. The money committed to the hoops tourney totally sucks the life out of the regular season. Now, keep in mind I'm not talking about this from a competitive standpoint. I'm not one of those yokels who says the hoops season is "meaningless". But from media value standpoint it's value is greatly diminished by the existence of the tourney.

The conference commissioners know this, and do not want to repeat that model for football. We can poke all sorts of holes in the "every game, every week" matters mantra about football. But from a media value standpoint that is absolutely true.

So, in a world where 4 or 5 superconferences are trying to extract every last media dime available, why would they devalue their core product? And that product is their ability to sell regular season rights, and carry those regular season games on their own networks. Once again, this isn't about the money that could be made from a playoff, it's about protecting the money that is critical to be made to ensure the viability of super conferences.

The one hedge is that if 4 super conferences emerge and decide to break away from the NCAA, I suppose they could form an alliance to create a 4-team playoff and share in that money. But there would be soooo many political ramifications of that approach (both in the splitting off and in the creation of a cartel) that I'm not certain we'll see that anytime soon.

 

[SaintTristan]

One of the "superconferences" will most definitely include SU. It's driven largely by football, yes, but there's no way that one of the biggest hoops programs in the country (with a proud football history) will be left out. No chance in hell. 100% that Syracuse is included in one of those conferences. Put it this way: why would Kansas, for example, be a shoe in over Syracuse? Out of the Big East, the obvious teams that are sure to be included are Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia...and that's about it. MAYBE Louisville. MAYBE UConn based on other sports. MAYBE USF based on where they're located. That's it.

bad post. you are wrong. Are you saying that memphis will deifnitely be in a super conf? they have a pretty good hoops team. how about 'zaga? then you ask why kansas would get in above SU...how about a better fan base and a hoops team thats just as good? the 4 conf's I name will pick over the B12 first + WV. then they have one to three slots total to fill with BE teams. The only place that thinks SU is guaranteed is this board.

you dont even name rutgers. B10 will take rutgers before SU. ACC might. ACC might also take UCONN before SU. SU could easily find itself on the outside looking in. everyone who knows anything about this knows this.

And that is why SU better be fighting to beef up the BE, as much as it sucks.

Now the good news is that with so many channels (ABCNBCCBSESPNVERSUSFOX) dedicating time to college football, even a deflated BE will still get a decent TV contract. Just wont be considered one of the premier conferences. More like CUSA in its hayday.

 

[jekelish]

Why would anyone take Rutgers over Syracuse? Seriously? I don't even understand why anyone would think that. Their football program historically blows, and they are crap in basketball year in and year out. I just don't understand why the hell you would possibly think anyone would prefer Rutgers, other than MAYBE the inroads in Jersey, which are overrated IMO.

UConn has no football history, either, and has had about 1.5 good years ever. I think UConn will be included, by the way, but I like Syracuse's chances a whole lot better than UConn's.

Also, to put Zaga and Memphis on the same plane as Syracuse is absurd. First of all, their hoops programs aren't historically as good. Secondly, football isn't even close to comparable. Thirdly, neither is in a major conference as is, so they wouldn't have the foot in the door, so to speak, to begin with.

 

[Scooch]

Is the NFL regular seaon rumor Ed by the playoffs? I don't see it.

The NFL controls the rights to both the regular season and the playoffs. It's all part of their deals.

College conferences only control the regular season rights to their home football games. Same for hoops. NCAA owns the rights to the hoops playoffs, not the conferences.

In other words, apples and oranges.

 

[Alsacs]

bad post. you are wrong. Are you saying that memphis will deifnitely be in a super conf? they have a pretty good hoops team. how about 'zaga? then you ask why kansas would get in above SU...how about a better fan base and a hoops team thats just as good? the 4 conf's I name will pick over the B12 first + WV. then they have one to three slots total to fill with BE teams. The only place that thinks SU is guaranteed is this board.

you dont even name rutgers. B10 will take rutgers before SU. ACC might. ACC might also take UCONN before SU. SU could easily find itself on the outside looking in. everyone who knows anything about this knows this.

And that is why SU better be fighting to beef up the BE, as much as it sucks.

Now the good news is that with so many channels (ABCNBCCBSESPNVERSUSFOX) dedicating time to college football, even a deflated BE will still get a decent TV contract. Just wont be considered one of the premier conferences. More like CUSA in its hayday.

ACC is not going to pick sUeConn over Syracuse if all things are equal. Do not forget the ACC-Big East lawsuit for tortuous interference. I do agree sadly that Rutgers is more likely than us to get into the B1G because they are landgrant state university and would be a fit in a public state flagship conference. Syracuse however, is more likely than any school in the current BE expect Pitt to get into the ACC if they expand. The reason is we are a private school like Duke, Wake Forest, Boston College and would bring basketball cache to a conference that is a basketball first conference as well.

 

[Millhouse]

Not couldn't. Wouldn't.

I'll elaborate...

The exponential difference in media value for conferences between college football and college basketball is due in large part to the value of each sport's post-season. The money committed to the hoops tourney totally sucks the life out of the regular season. Now, keep in mind I'm not talking about this from a competitive standpoint. I'm not one of those yokels who says the hoops season is "meaningless". But from media value standpoint it's value is greatly diminished by the existence of the tourney.

The conference commissioners know this, and do not want to repeat that model for football. We can poke all sorts of holes in the "every game, every week" matters mantra about football. But from a media value standpoint that is absolutely true.

So, in a world where 4 or 5 superconferences are trying to extract every last media dime available, why would they devalue their core product? And that product is their ability to sell regular season rights, and carry those regular season games on their own networks. Once again, this isn't about the money that could be made from a playoff, it's about protecting the money that is critical to be made to ensure the viability of super conferences.

The one hedge is that if 4 super conferences emerge and decide to break away from the NCAA, I suppose they could form an alliance to create a 4-team playoff and share in that money. But there would be soooo many political ramifications of that approach (both in the splitting off and in the creation of a cartel) that I'm not certain we'll see that anytime soon.

College basketball's regular season wouldn't be so devalued if it were an 8 or 16 playoff. College football wouldn't and couldn't repeat that 64 team model.

 

[rrlbees]

bad post. you are wrong. Are you saying that memphis will deifnitely be in a super conf? they have a pretty good hoops team. how about 'zaga? then you ask why kansas would get in above SU...how about a better fan base and a hoops team thats just as good? the 4 conf's I name will pick over the B12 first + WV. then they have one to three slots total to fill with BE teams. The only place that thinks SU is guaranteed is this board.

you dont even name rutgers. B10 will take rutgers before SU. ACC might. ACC might also take UCONN before SU. SU could easily find itself on the outside looking in. everyone who knows anything about this knows this.

And that is why SU better be fighting to beef up the BE, as much as it sucks.

Now the good news is that with so many channels (ABCNBCCBSESPNVERSUSFOX) dedicating time to college football, even a deflated BE will still get a decent TV contract. Just wont be considered one of the premier conferences. More like CUSA in its hayday.

This is a very uninformed post.

 

[SaintTristan]

This is a very uninformed post.

right...