Conference Expansion and New Bowl - The End Game?

[BamaFossil]

This may be obvious or already discussed by most folks here but I don't mind being late to the table. Here's how I see it shaking out...

SEC alliance with Big 12 for the New Bowl is the first overt action in the move to independence from the bowl system, the BCS, and maybe even the NCAA as presently constructed.

New Bowl is only meaningful if the SEC and Big 12 champions meet. That brings the big bucks. Anything else is just another bowl. So the intention must be that the conference champions will indeed meet in the New Bowl. Hold that thought.

In the future, Rose Bowl takes the PAC and Big 10 champions. Yes... The champions of those conferences. Then the winner of the Rose Bowl and New Bowl play in a TBD Bowl. The four conferences declare the winner of the TBD Bowl to be their champion. End of story.

The BCS? It didn't exist a couple of decades ago and will fade back into oblivion. The BCS structure may hobble along for a year or so and declare the winner of the Rutgers-USF game to be the BCS champion... but nobody will be listening. The Champions Cartel - and other voting entities such as the AP - will award the NC to the winner of the TBD Bowl. Public perception will agree.

In this scenario a school cannot have a gold-plated path to the Rose or New Bowl every year. (Texas, Okie, & Southern Cal, that's you.) Therefore the conferences agree to equal membership and a championship game... which means they have between 14 or 16 teams. Probably 16 with a pod concept.

FSU and Clemson see this scenario unfolding and bolt to the Big 12. (A couple of weeks ago I said NO WAY this happens. New Bowl changes everything.) As soon as FSU and Clemson go, the ACC is like a sheep and four wolves voting on what they're going to have for dinner. Party's over. Big Ten starts taking applications. ACC and Big East schools fall all over themselves to apply for admission. ND takes one of the Big Ten slots. SEC takes one of UVA or VaTech; and one of UNC or NCState.

The schools in the Champions Cartel withdraw from the NCAA and create their own governing body. They drop the nit-picking rules. They allow players to receive a stipend. They maintain an Enforcement Arm to ensure everyone plays by the same rules. Penalties for given offenses are known and applied equally without favortism.

Dust settles and in a few years this is the norm for college football.

SEC wins in this scenario. The Big 12 is boxed out from logical geographic expansion and must jump to the east to pick up their remaining teams. Thus the in-state SEC school (specifically Florida and South Carolina) has the recruiting advantage. Big 12 remains a weaker partner for the SEC.

On the other side of the equation, the Big Ten can add some prestigious schools. By saving the Big 12, the PAC is severely restricted in available schools since they can't poach the Big 12. The PAC takes BYU... and (after considerable consternation...) Boise... Then fish around for a couple more to fill out their conference. But it's not all bad for the PAC. The Big Ten champion must travel across the country every year to meet the PAC champion on the PAC champion's home turf in most years. PAC team usually wins this match-up.

Over the long run, the final TBD Bowl will most often feature the SEC champion vs. the PAC champion. I like that matchup.

IMO people who are saying New Bowl will simply be Cotton Bowl Part Deaux aren't seeing the bigger picture. A restructuring of college football may be nearer than we think. And nearer than many of us (myself included) would like.

 

[GrayTide]

I think you laid it out pretty well Fossil. Four super conferences of 16 teams each with two 8 team divisions. There are essentially 14 remaining spots open. PAC 12 (4) Big 10 (4) Big XII (4) and SEC (2). The Big XII number assumes Clemson and FSU bolt from the soon to be defunct ACC. The New Bowl champ vs the Rose Bowl champ for the NC. The remaining 60 teams can play in their own division. Classic case of the haves vs the have nots, that's life.

 

[bamaga]

The way I see it, Everything that is happening in CFB is in response to the SEC, its dominance, and how to stay ahead of/ or keep up with. The realignment/ expansion was to renegotiate or open contract discussions in response to the SEC's then epic deals with ESPN and CBS. Recruiting rule changes was an effort to limit SEC coaches , The newest round of playoff discussion is in response to the SEC's BCS CG dominance, the B12/SEC bowl deal was in response to the PAC12/B1G Rose bowl response to the SEC. The SEC, by winning, is the root of all evil in CFB:eek2::conf3:

 

[bamaga]

Seriously BF, 16 team leagues, and the rest of the scenario you laid out will never happen. 3 words. Lawsuits, lawyers and congress.

 

[BamaFossil]

Seriously BF, 16 team leagues, and the rest of the scenario you laid out will never happen. 3 words. Lawsuits, lawyers and congress.

I wonder. I'm no lawyer. However, I doubt a school - Troy, let's say - has a case to sue for admission to the SEC or any specific sports conference. So four sports conferences decide their champions will play... How does that bring about a winnable lawsuit?

Then the two remaining winners play. Again, what's the basis of a lawsuit?

There would be no self-declaration of a national champion. Just a playoff between consenting conferences. The playoff winner gets a trophy and is declared the four-conference winner.

Newspapers, the AP, or whatever may refer to the final winner as a "national champion"... But not the conferences. It's simply an expanded consortium of colleges enjoying football.

Certainly Congress could jump into the picture and who knows where that would go...

 

[ccc2259]

Fossil, it's hard to argue with your logic, but if I understand you correctly, it does contradict the (public) SEC position that a playoff should allow for more than one team per conference.

 

[BamaFossil]

Fossil, it's hard to argue with your logic, but if I understand you correctly, it does contradict the (public) SEC position that a playoff should allow for more than one team per conference.

I understand and agree re the contradiction.. In the scenario I posited, the SEC would trade away (a) the possibility that in some years two SEC teams could compete in a 4-team playoff; for (b) the certainty that every year the SEC has one team in a 4-team playoff.

This isn't a bad tradeoff IMO. In today's world it's the pollsters who determine which teams are to participate in a playoff. SEC fatigue by the pollsters could make it a long time before the SEC has two teams in the top four anyway.

 

[bamaga]

I wonder. I'm no lawyer. However, I doubt a school - Troy, let's say - has a case to sue for admission to the SEC or any specific sports conference. So four sports conferences decide their champions will play... How does that bring about a winnable lawsuit?

Then the two remaining winners play. Again, what's the basis of a lawsuit?

There would be no self-declaration of a national champion. Just a playoff between consenting conferences. The playoff winner gets a trophy and is declared the four-conference winner.

Newspapers, the AP, or whatever may refer to the final winner as a "national champion"... But not the conferences. It's simply an expanded consortium of colleges enjoying football.

Certainly Congress could jump into the picture and who knows where that would go...

Inclusion. Not necessarily to join a conference, but to participate in the agreement. If all the major powers are concentrated in those 4 conferences, and they play exclusively in the post season(as they would have to), the winner is the National champion. That would lock out all other participants. that is the basis of a lawsuit. plus, some' has been' would get locked out, or an 'up and comer' and would use the threat of congressional involvement to force change.the Orrin Hatch option.
Secondly, with 16 teams how would you determine a champion? 2 - 8 team divisons(the only real possibility or 4 4 team divisions9 Not really an option)? Not really getting after you, I liked the idea, just can't really see it ever happening. I am really getting turned off by all the off field issues facing CFB and still believe the NCAA will have to deal with the concussion issues at some point in the future as well. I bring that up because it may well change CFB as we know it.

 

[RJ YellowHammer]

I understand and agree re the contradiction.. In the scenario I posited, the SEC would trade away (a) the possibility that in some years two SEC teams could compete in a 4-team playoff; for (b) the certainty that every year the SEC has one team in a 4-team playoff.

This isn't a bad tradeoff IMO. In today's world it's the pollsters who determine which teams are to participate in a playoff. SEC fatigue by the pollsters could make it a long time before the SEC has two teams in the top four anyway.

The (imo correct) perception that the best CFB is played in the SEC isn't going to change as long as the most talented, most well coached teams are still in this conference. The media, pollsters, and unbiased football fans see the level the game is played at down here and, maybe more importantly, see all of the SEC players on NFL rosters. An open plus one scenario is good for the SEC, the conference champion scenario isn't. That's why Delaney protests so much; he's using the "sanctity" of the Rose Bowl as a cover.

 

[T Rey]

BF, this format would be creating an 8 team playoff or a 16 team palyoff depending on if the 4 super conferences work from a 2 division system or a 4 pod system. The round of 8 would be the conference title games and if it was a pod system the round of 16 would be a four team playoff in each conference for the right to enter the intra-conference 4 team playoff for the championship.

With the pod system you play 3 games within the pod and 3 games (1 from each of the other pods). In addition to the conference schedule each team plays 1 game with a team from each of the other coferences for a 9 game base schedule. The 10th game would be some type of kick-off weekend classic that would rotate which coferences play eachother in a given year. Add to that a 24 bowl game schedule so that every team plays at least 11 games, 8 teams play12, 4 teams play 13 and 2 teams play 14.

Could this concept ever happen? Yes. Will it ever happen? I have no clue but it was fun to at least think about.

 

[bamaga]

BF, this format would be crating an 8 team playoff or a 16 team palyoff depending on if the 4 super conferences work from a 2 division system or a 4 pod system. The round of 8 would be the conference title games and if it was a pod system ithe round of 16 would be a four team playoff in each conference for the right to enter the intra-conference 4 team playoff for the championship.

With the pod system you play 3 games within the pod and 3 games (1 from each of the other pods). In addition to the conference schedule each team plays 1 game with a team from each of the other coferences for a 9 game base schedule. The 10th game would be some type of kick-off weekend classic that would rotate which coferences play eachother in a given year. Add to that a 24 bowl game schedule so that every team plays at least 11 games, 8 teams play12, 4 teams play 13 and 2 teams play 14.

Could this concept ever happen? Yes. Will it ever happen? I have no clue but it was fun to at least think about.

I am a little confused by your response. This scenario has how many regular season games and how many bowl games and how many total games? I can not see less than 12 regular season games as Bean Counters will never allow that and academia will protest more than 15 total games. you can book that.

 

[T Rey]

I am a little confused by your response. This scenario has how many regular season games and how many bowl games and how many total games? I can not see less than 12 regular season games as Bean Counters will never allow that and academia will protest more than 15 total games. you can book that.

"Add to that a 24 bowl game schedule so that every team plays at least 11 games, 8 teams play12, 4 teams play 13 and 2 teams play 14."

I limited the max number of games to 14 for just the reason you mentioned. The downside of that is that 48 of the 64 teams would only have 11 games. I am not saying it will happen just giving one of the potential answers to what could happen with a 4 super conference cash cow.

If you add a second intra-conference game series, eliminate the kickoff classic and the 24 bowl games; then you have 64 teams wil 12 games, 8 teams with 13 games, 4 teams with 14 games and 2 teams with 15 games.

 

[bamaga]

"Add to that a 24 bowl game schedule so that every team plays at least 11 games, 8 teams play12, 4 teams play 13 and 2 teams play 14."

I limited the max number of games to 14 for just the reason you mentioned. The downside of that is that 48 of the 64 teams would only have 11 games. I am not saying it will happen just giving one of the potential answers to what could happen with a 4 super conference cash cow.

If you add a second intra-conference game series, eliminate the kickoff classic and the 24 bowl games; then you have 64 teams wil 12 games, 8 teams with 13 games, 4 teams with 14 games and 2 teams with 15 games.

delete

 

[BamaFossil]

Inclusion. Not necessarily to join a conference, but to participate in the agreement. If all the major powers are concentrated in those 4 conferences, and they play exclusively in the post season(as they would have to), the winner is the National champion. That would lock out all other participants. that is the basis of a lawsuit. plus, some' has been' would get locked out, or an 'up and comer' and would use the threat of congressional involvement to force change.the Orrin Hatch option.
...

bamaga - I'm not there yet re understanding the inclusion argument as a basis for a lawsuit. Not that what I think or am capable of understanding matters...

I think everyone agrees that an outside school cannot reasonably sue for inclusion in the SECCG... or for inclusion in any conference's championship game. We likewise know two conferences can agree for their respective champions to play in a bowl game and can do so without litigation - e.g. Rose Bowl. So you see something in the next step up the latter - namely, that two bowl winners play - that makes the event ripe for litigation. That's the link I'm not grasping.

I understand that the four conferences can't safely refer to their championship game as a "national championship game". No problem. However, the press and the AP can do whatever they like.

Or, would it make a difference if 64 schools all left the NCAA and joined the same newly created conference with a newly created governing body. A Pacific Division, a Big Ten Division, a Big Tex Division, and a Southern Division. They then proceed as outlined in the OP.

Maybe I'm reading more into New Bowl than is there. But if the End Game isn't somewhat along the lines of what's posited above, I don't understand the purpose of New Bowl other than a replacement for the Cotton Bowl but with conference ownership of the bowl. Maybe that's the extent of the End Game... But if so, that's checkers and I was hoping for Go.

Ah well... Interesting speculation for the off-season.

 

[RJ YellowHammer]

Maybe I'm reading more into New Bowl than is there. But if the End Game isn't somewhat along the lines of what's posited above, I don't understand the purpose of New Bowl other than a replacement for the Cotton Bowl but with conference ownership of the bowl. Maybe that's the extent of the End Game... But if so, that's checkers and I was hoping for Go.

Ah well... Interesting speculation for the off-season.

New Bowl is a bargaining chip for Slive. Delaney and Scott keep playing the Rose Bowl angle in negotiating the plus one. Slive just guaranteed himself a voting partner, the Big 12.

 

[BigBama76]

The only problem I see with this idea, especially the part about abandoning the NCAA is it leaves out basketball. Not that this new "NCAA" wouldn't have basketball, just that a lot of the teams left out of this scenario have good basketball programs.

 

[teamplayer]

I just can't see all of the changes that some are predicting being anywhere near feasible. Most of these institutions are public universities that receive public funding. If you think that they will be allowed to simply segregate themselves from the rest of the football playing universities, I wonder what society you have been watching the last fifty years. I wish they would quit messing with my favorite pastime and quit trying to fix something that isn't broken. The bowl system has been great. The BCS has done exactly what it was designed to do almost every year. If they go to a four team playoff, that will be okay. Guess what, though, they will then argue over the 5th and 6th place teams that should have gotten in and want to expand that field. In my mind, college football is the best thing going. I am afraid egos and greed are about to destroy it. I hope I am wrong.

 

[GrayTide]

As I have said on more than one occasion; the Big 10/ PAC 12 Rose Bowl motive is to assure 2 spots in a playoff or +1 which guarantees that no more than 1 SEC team gets into the final mix.
This also prohibits the NC game from being held in the Rose Bowl.

 

[bamaga]

bamaga - I'm not there yet re understanding the inclusion argument as a basis for a lawsuit. Not that what I think or am capable of understanding matters...

I think everyone agrees that an outside school cannot reasonably sue for inclusion in the SECCG... or for inclusion in any conference's championship game. We likewise know two conferences can agree for their respective champions to play in a bowl game and can do so without litigation - e.g. Rose Bowl. So you see something in the next step up the latter - namely, that two bowl winners play - that makes the event ripe for litigation. That's the link I'm not grasping.

I understand that the four conferences can't safely refer to their championship game as a "national championship game". No problem. However, the press and the AP can do whatever they like.

Or, would it make a difference if 64 schools all left the NCAA and joined the same newly created conference with a newly created governing body. A Pacific Division, a Big Ten Division, a Big Tex Division, and a Southern Division. They then proceed as outlined in the OP.

Maybe I'm reading more into New Bowl than is there. But if the End Game isn't somewhat along the lines of what's posited above, I don't understand the purpose of New Bowl other than a replacement for the Cotton Bowl but with conference ownership of the bowl. Maybe that's the extent of the End Game... But if so, that's checkers and I was hoping for Go.

Ah well... Interesting speculation for the off-season.

Secede from the NCAA would be the only way this would happen. Call it what you wish, but one of the teams in the power 64 conferences would automatically win the NC. If you take the best programs , isolate them from the rest of CFB and play a 'members only' bowl game(s), that will lock out all other schools. For the same reasons NON AQ schools have been granted access to the BCS, The same arguments still exist.

 

[bamaga]

New Bowl is a bargaining chip for Slive. Delaney and Scott keep playing the Rose Bowl angle in negotiating the plus one. Slive just guaranteed himself a voting partner, the Big 12.

yup. politics make strange bedfellows!!