Why join a Conference?

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
11,042
907
237
76
Boaz, AL USA
Someone mentioned playing every team in conference as being one of the reasons to join a conference. I had never put much thought into the WHY join a conference. Looking at the past I saw several teams moving in and out. Ga Tech HC Dodd had a feud with The Bear and with SEC recruiting (namely Bama's recruiting) and they went independent in the late sixties. Then later they joined the ACC.

But it appears TV money and the conference $$$ split, conference tie-ins in bowl games and now jockeying for Playoff spots has driven the final nail in Independency. If Notre Dame can't make it without a quasi ACC bowl consideration deal then what chance does the others have going it alone? Scheduling is much easier also because a conference team only has to round up three or four games while the independent must round up twelve games from a shrinking field.

BYU has their own Mormon TV Network and was a MWC member but longed for a P5 conference. I really think they will have to go back to the MWC because of their geographic travel problems. If Independence is in fact a thing of the past what other reasons are there for joining a conference?
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,284
30,895
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
True independence died in the 90s. Notre Dame isn't truly independent anymore, depending on the ACC for its non-revenue sports as well as football scheduling help and bowl game access. BYU depends on the WCC for this and Army depends on the Patriot League.

At some point Notre Dame will join a conference fully in football. BYU was stupid to leave the MWC. Army's situation is unique and they are probably better suited staying independent in football.
 

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator
Staff member
Nov 8, 2004
9,568
12,865
237
Tuscaloosa
It generates fan interest and limits your downside risk.

Fan interest comes as rivalries crop up as you play the same teams over long periods of time. The fan interest helps attendance, merchandising, television and all other sources of revenue.

Downside risk is limited by the diversification of performance over time. If you're not one of the Top 5 to 10 programs, you inevitably have down periods when you're not going to bowls and other sources of revenue start to falter.

If you're in a conference, other teams will be doing well, and you'll share in the fruits of their good performance. You pay them back when the worm turns and you're on top when they falter. Meanwhile, the rivalries you've developed also take some of the pain out of the bottom of the inevitable cyclicality.

Essentially, being in a conference is a form of insurance for your athletic department's long-term prosperity.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
You know, I'm not sure I could say playing every team in a conference is particularly important. Yes, it's very important to people that want to increase conference games, it's basically the only legitimate argument for increasing conference games, but... no one wants to join the Big 10 to play Maryland, no one wants to join the Big 12 to play Iowa St., I see that as kind of having inflated importance.

To me, the main reward for a conference is the collective interest it creates. Without a conference the focus is almost solely on that particular team. Some people say they don't get the SEC cheers or what not, but there is a collective interest there, where we are going to watch not just Alabama, but LSU, and Florida, and so on and sometimes yes, cheer for them as representatives of the conference. This can't be achieved without a conference. I think there are some programs who arguably can manage being independents (Notre Dame, Texas, Alabama) but it requires giving up a lot.

I think in some ways you could argue for having less conference games as a way to gain the benefits that independents have without losing the benefits of a conference. For instance, Notre Dame plays a reduced slate of ACC games, meaning they are free to schedule Stanford, Texas, USC, Army, Navy and Michigan St. in 2016. Which is really more interesting, that or making sure they play Wake Forest often? Same thing going back to the 1970s Alabama schedules. It was a 10 team conference so Alabama could easily have played the entire conference like the Big 12 does now, instead they only played 6 conference games and scheduled a lot of high profile OOC games instead.

People are being brainwashed into thinking otherwise, but honestly I'd be fine with reducing SEC games, why again does Alabama need to play anyone other than Tennessee from the SEC East outside of the conference championship game? Anyway, if they got away from that sort of obsession I'd think even Notre Dame would be lining up to join a conference.
 
Last edited:

TommyMac

Hall of Fame
Apr 24, 2001
14,040
33
0
83
Mobile, Alabama
Someone mentioned playing every team in conference as being one of the reasons to join a conference. I had never put much thought into the WHY join a conference. Looking at the past I saw several teams moving in and out. Ga Tech HC Dodd had a feud with The Bear and with SEC recruiting (namely Bama's recruiting) and they went independent in the late sixties. Then later they joined the ACC.


But it appears TV money and the conference $$$ split, conference tie-ins in bowl games and now jockeying for Playoff spots has driven the final nail in Independency. If Notre Dame can't make it without a quasi ACC bowl consideration deal then what chance does the others have going it alone? Scheduling is much easier also because a conference team only has to round up three or four games while the independent must round up twelve games from a shrinking field.


BYU has their own Mormon TV Network and was a MWC member but longed for a P5 conference. I really think they will have to go back to the MWC because of their geographic travel problems. If Independence is in fact a thing of the past what other reasons are there for joining a conference?



Bobby Dodd and GaTech left the SEC for two reasons...........they realized they couldn't beat Coach Bryant and they got too big for their britches. They reasoned that they could avoid Coach Bryant and make a ton of $$$ by going independent , they were right about Coach Bryant, but they badly misjudged their importance to CFB.

Tech was riding a 4 game winning streak over Bama when Coach Bryant home set things right. Coach went 6-1 against Dodd and embarrassed Dodd's highly regarded O's. Bama outscored them 109-55 and it could've been worse, they only scored in double digits twice, 15 points and 11 points.

Shug Jordan said that Coach Bryant brought a helmet busting hell for leather brand of football to the SEC. Guess it didn't take long for Dodd to realize that he wanted no part of it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator
Staff member
Nov 8, 2004
9,568
12,865
237
Tuscaloosa
Interesting that Dodd takes "credit" for GT going independent after the 1964 season. Then he admits to foreseeing "lean years" coming only two years later, and bails ostensibly so a younger coach can cope.

There's no doubt in my mind that he realized he'd screwed up, that GT really couldn't be successful alone, and needed a conference far more than he formerly thought. But that bridge was burned, ground into the dirt, and the earth salted.

As Confederate Railroad articulated decades later, when you leave like that, you can't come back. So he rode off into the sunset while his reputation was still intact. I can think of several descriptors, every one of which would get me suspended or banned.
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.