Deep South includes South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana

They've got to realize the importance of preserving interest in the games, even in places that are not currently within their two conference boundaries. They don't want people in half the country to lose interest in college football and basketball. And if they remain two relatively small entities, that is what will happen. Lots of VT, FSU, Oregon, UNC, Duke fans, etc. watch Bama versus Auburn and OSU versus Michigan games...at least they do now. You relegate all those fan bases, along with entire NE, Midwestern, Four corners, and Pacific Northwest states, it's gonna begin to impact SEC and B1G TV ratings. I also believe that there is at least a little bit of concern about the integrity of the sport. The NCAA is totally incapable of addressing things like the new NIL and transfer portal rules. The B1G and SEC can address them. That MUST be done. Even major powers are concerned about what sleezeball programs like Texas Aandm, MIami, and Louisville are up to. ** Edited by BBBDatVT at 7/29/2022, 10:43:24 AM

to assume the money will keep flowing and that is all they care about. What is best for college football, or college sports as a whole, is not on their radar. In fact, when someone like Jim Phillips starts talking about what is best for college sports and college athletes, he faces a lot of criticism for living in the past, or being out of touch. People are not looking past what brings in more money for their conferences. This attitude promotes competition between conferences, therefore raids, and destroying the weaker conferences. No reason to believe that will change. A perfect example is last years Alliance between the PAC, BIG and ACC. They were agreeing not to raid each other and work together for the good of college sports. Look how that turned out. Unless a major change in attitude happens, we will continue down the road we are traveling. And there is no change in sight. It is all about the money, not the athletes, fans, colleges, or about college sports as a whole. Anything that brings in more money is fair game if you can make it happen, and it makes you stronger. It is capitalism in action, and capitalism needs some checks and balances. Unbridled capitalism usually doesn't end well, except for a small few. That is why most pro sports leagues have checks and balances such as a draft, salary cap, etc.... College sports is turning into pro sports but without the balances of a draft or salary cap or other such things. No, this is not going to end well for most. And it is only a matter of time before the lower levels of the BIG and SEC get eaten as well. Eventually, the Alabama's and Ohio States will get tired of carrying the Rutgers and Vanderbilts. When you have exhausted other means of increasing your money, start taking it away from the schools that are not carring their weight. ** Edited by wwhokie1 at 7/29/2022, 3:09:16 PM

would be quite the basketball conference. Presently and historically.

Leaving ASU out is like leaving Virginia Tech or NC State out. Arizona is a rapidly growing state. ** Edited by Old Line Hokie at 7/28/2022, 7:16:56 PM

I read a recent report that Arizona is seeking autonomy in making conference decisions so that they can leave ASU behind. Either way, i just don't sense that the state of Arizona is nearly as passionate about college athletics as North Carolina for instance. So, i think one program in this new league is suffice. I chose UNLV because Vegas sure seems like a hot commodity of late. That's a program that would have a lot to offer this new thing. i could see multiple playoff/championship games played there. Louisville? I don't think there's too many folks around who are gonna shed a tear for that currupt commuter college program.

before UNLV. No matter how this ultimately ends, I don't see ANY Group of 5 schools getting promoted. I do, however, see quite a few worthy schools being relegated to a lower tier.

BYU is always gonna have some issues with regard to the culture clash that they represent. it's been commonly known that the Pac 12 schools wanted nothing to do with them over those cultural issues. You think USC or UCLA is gonna advocate for them to be one of the additional western teams? IT wouldn't surprise me too much if Louisville, BYU, or Arizona State found a landing spot, but i would choose UNLV all day. They could become a legit program.

that allows the winning teams to rise and losing teams to sink.

starters.

flat out can't work in college football.

season. This in the lower tier at the top of the standings are promoted. And yes it can work in college football. Unfortunately it won't be tried because people are more concerned about protecting their fiefdoms rather than doing what is best for the growth of the sport and what is just for all of its schools, so the hypothesis can't be tested. Fear and ignorance among leaders who pretend to innovative won't allow it it to happen. But the thread is about the ideal, not what will happen.

We may as well stay in the second tier ACC.

That's the point of promotion and relegation. You can't just rest on your glory days from 20 years ago. You have to earn it every year. Makes for a far better product in my opinion. And if you fail, you can bounce back to the top tier in short order.

Any real competition near the top of the table. We’ve got the same thing now in college football. Will Stewert even wrote an article on it a while back. There’s no salary caps, draft, contracts in college football but we do have free agency and ways to pay players. The most recently successful schools became elite more popular and just get richer. It’s kind of a sad state.

while making teams earn their keep to stay at the top. Sure, there's the elite (Big Six) in the PL. But a club like Leicester City can win the PL after only their second year since promotion. Look, there's going to be elites no matter how you slice it. But the system that give opportunity for growth and inclusion based on merit is to me a superior system. If a team doesn't belong, then they don't last long in their respective tier, and that's fine. But a system that includes Rutgers and Vandy, but doesn't include Washington or Oklahoma State is flawed to say the least.

definitely the exception to the rule. Blackburn is the other exception to the rule club. Premier League Titles ManU = 13 Man City = 6 Chelsea = 5 Arsenal = 3 Blackburn = 1 Leicester = 1 Liverpool = 1 The other potential issue issue college football could have with promotion/relegation is there is nothing to prevent players, on teams that are relegated, from leaving at the end of the season or the end of the second season to join another team. At least European football has contracts with salary adjustment clauses to prevent a mass exodus. It is entirely possible that you may still end up with an unfair system just in a different format. For example, Rutgers and Vandy are the 2 teams relegated at the end of the period of time. What is there to prevent their entire roster (and maybe their next recruiting class) from entering the Portal to avoid participating in the relegation? After all college athletes only have a 5 year window to play a sport, so a large percentage of them won't willingly want to experience the relegation. The ones that do are likely the same ones that currently transfer from a DI-FBS team to a DI-FCS, DII, DIII, or NAIA team because they want more PT.

I don't want to get into all the possible solutions, but clearly there would need to be guidelines to prevent what you are bringing up. I also think the free possible transfer of everyone at the end of every season is not a good policy no matter what format there is. I don't know what to say about Blackburn, but it is part of the intrigue of relegation and promotion. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/29/2022, 2:51:31 AM

left the barn. Also, any rules restricting a student-athlete's movement in a sport, but not the other sports, or even in all sports could now be viewed as a violation of anti-trust laws. The reason I bring up the EPL's championship history is because even if college athletics implement some sort of promotion/relegation system, it doesn't mean anything will change from how it is now. The same 6-10 schools will be competing annually for championships and the remaining schools are along for the ride collecting paychecks. Also, there will be a group of schools that yo-yo between the 2 tiers (i.e. Burnley, Blackburn, Crystal Palace, Stoke City, West Brom, Watford, Fulham, and maybe Aston Villa). Now some of those clubs were able to weather the storm until they were able to remain in the EPL for multiple seasons in a row to the point they were consistently safe from the relegation zone. Eventually all except Crystal Palace (for now) had their luck run out at some point and had to face relegation. A couple even had to face the reality of being relegated from the Championship League to Football League One. I think there have only been 1 or 2 clubs that experienced going from the EPL to eventually being relegated to Football League Two before working their way back to the Championship League.

And heck, when we're good/decent at football, we bring eyes to the TV and put butts in seats.

And there are years when VT wasn't a Top 40 program in that stretch. Particularly lately. In my vision of a R-P system, there would be 13 teams in the East (of Chicago) and 13 teams in the West in the Top Tier. That's 26. Have East and West first place teams play in a national final.

Both PL soccer and NFL. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/28/2022, 6:43:17 PM

Does the Cincinnati team that put it all together to make the playoffs get promoted for their performance? Because they are going to be a mediocre team after all they lost. It just doesn't work because past performance has no bearing on future performance for 95% of teams.

Happens all the time in the EFL. They're called yo-yo clubs. Some seem perpetually up and down (Fulham, Watford, West Brom, and Norwich come to mind). Some were yo-yo clubs for years, but seem to have built up the staying power to remain in the Premier League (Crystal Palace and Leicester). Look at Alabama. They will probably have an even higher turnover of their roster due to people leaving early for the NFL. But you and I would both conclude that their roster four years from now will be pretty darn good. Another note, having good programs getting relegated is actually good for the system. It gives some star power to the second tier even if the team is just down there for one year. And to have an upstart underdog in the Top Flight would be good for the sport as well. A note about Cincinnati. You and assumed they were good because they finished undefeated in a mediocre league. If they were in Tier 2 of the type of system I am talking about, they would be far more tested than what they are in the AAC--and likely may not even make the Top Flight to begin with. On the other hand, IF they were legit, the system would leave no doubt because their schedule would be IDENTICAL to those ALSO competing to get into the Top Flight. There is no adequate schedule comparison on the small sample size of incongruent OOC games like we have now. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/29/2022, 10:01:16 AM

weaker and less experienced team, lose big and get sent down. The team promoted has no relationship to the team that led to the promotion. It makes no sense and doesn't work with college roster turnover.

UC is hardly a one hit wonder. They are 44-7 in the last four seasons. And UC wouldn't be in the top tier unless they proved themselves against an equitable schedule in Tier 2 which would be much better than the current AAC. And let's say your worst fears about this outlying example you are fixated on would actually be true. Compare it to the football schedules of today. The elite teams have OOC cupcakes (at home) on their schedule who they have no business playing. And if you look at the SEC, how do you explain Vandy being in the league year after year being homecoming cannon fodder for pretty much everyone? Don't look now, but Alabama has UL-Monroe and Vandy back to back on the schedule in September. There would be none of this in a relegation-promotion system. Also, resources gravitate to the promoted. This means TV money, recruits, transfers, coaching talent and even fan interest. Would this be enough to turn Cincinnati (or Virginia Tech) into Alabama? Perhaps not. But it would be proven on the field instead of in boardrooms by educrats and corporate TV execs. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/29/2022, 9:19:14 AM

The MLS doesn't have 130 (FBS) clubs, plus additional leagues below it (FCS), as a base for a system. If they did, I promise you they'd have promotion and relegation. And in fact, that's in part why the MLS is looked at as a joke by the rest of the world. College football in America, just as pro soccer in England have a century and a half of tradition and support for their teams and the sport as a whole. MLS isn't even in the conversation with that kind of depth in the culture.

relegation. The reason MLS doesn't participate in it is because the MLS clubs are not independently owned. Instead, MLS is a single entity league. "What this means is that the league is registered as a single legal entity that owns all the clubs that are part of it as well as all player contracts. In turn, all the teams part of the single-entity structure have an investor-operator who are shareholders in the overall league. Besides the MLS, Major League Rugby (MLR), the only professional rugby league in North America, also follows the same model, while the Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA) had initially started as a single-entity structure as well."

called MLS NEXT and MLS NEXT PRO. Not sure how this whole universe is supposed to work together with drafts, etc., but at least they’re working on a farm system for players and coaches of some kind.

I understand the challenges of doing that when the sport if very young. I'm not trying to rag on them. I really hope they can do it.

This new thing that ESPN, FOX, the B1G, and SEC creates is going to be much more comparable to the National Football League than futbol. And I love futbol. Speaking of culture, you really think the SEC is gonna adopt the international relegation system over more traditionally American structures? Of the four entities, the SEC is likely the most powerful. It really does..."just mean more" down there.

competition and making money, they should embrace it. I only said it would be ideal. In your graphic, most of the teams are currently being frozen out by the P2 Cartel. Why would they want to circle back and include them? ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/28/2022, 6:34:45 PM ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/28/2022, 6:35:52 PM

They are redefining the sport right now. They know it. Everybody knows it. If they wanted the ACC dissolved, they could coordinate it tomorrow. I think that's the conclusion they will soon make, but they're figuring it all out. Seems like Notre Dame is holding out and everyone is waiting on them. just a matter of time. Anyhow, with the NIL, transfer portal, realignment, etc. surely the B1G and SEC realize that the entire system needs an overhaul. They will be the ones who do that. They need each other to do that too. I also think they are going to realize the importance of keeping college football and basketball relevant in the parts of the country that are not represented in their leagues. that's why I added Syracuse to my graphic. It's why the new world order of college sports will include NC and Virginia too. I've followed realignment for about 20 years now and this is how it happens. Some bigtime surprises, but most of the stuff that has occurred was predicted on this very board.

They aren't going to include most of the teams on your map. Just watch Warren's speech and Q&A at the B1G media days. He is about making money for his conference members and grandstanding about the "opportunities" they'll have. The SEC and B1G aren't going to work together to reform college football in the way that you and I want it. It will be exclusive, not inclusive. In posts below, you seem upset that somehow we aren't in the SEC already or that the ACC hasn't acted like a big time football conference. But on the other hand, you seem to think the B1G and SEC leadership are going to take care of everything in the end. I'm really not sure where you are going with all this. I'll take you at your word that you have been following all of this for 20 years, even though you just joined TSL today. I too have followed it for that long and so have many people on this board who have thousands of posts. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/28/2022, 7:09:15 PM

The BIG and SEC are surely gonna realize that if they leave the entire Northeast, most of the mountain and western time zones, large states like Virginia and North Carolina out, that will impact the ratings for Auburn-Alabama and OSU vs Michigan. Millions of People in those left out regions of the country will no longer be college football and basketball fans. And oh, you better believe that some sort of organized structure is going to be put into place. Even Penn State and Michigan aren’t gonna want to see Texas AamdM buying up 5stars for long. Even Alabama is complaining about it. The entire thing is a train wreck right now and the B1G and SEC are certainly gonna work together to fix it. If they don’t work together, everyone loses.

Nothing in the past can help to figure what is next. To me, bigger changes evolved as TV money went thru the roof. I just we had accepted that SEC offer 10 years ago, but it "was not up to our academics" and we were "at home in our ACC footprint".... Poppycock !!!!

I'd always have felt we'd be more "at home" in the SEC. But I am in the minority I guess. Our entry to the ACC has impacted our ability to leave. That is all. WRT the ever changing nature of "realignment", I agree with you again. I think most of felt that if the ACC imploded that we'd "have a landing spot" in the SEC or a stout Big XII that included Oklahoma and Texas. That's changed now. I've said on numerous posts earlier that the only LOCK in the ACC for a nice landing spot is UNC. UVa is like a poor man's Stanford, and look where Stanford is right now. Tech is kinda like a poor man's Oregon. And look where Oregon is right now. Clemson and FSU are not locks to be taken by the SEC either. The SEC already has a boatload of those types of schools, and they really don't NEED two more. Now I don't want to be all doom and gloom. Do I think a good many ACC teams will have a good chance at making the P2? Yes. But no one (save UNC) should be resting in it. And the whole thing will be based on the whims of the SEC and B1G brass. Merit won't guarantee a thing. Lastly, the UT/OU to SEC move was a game changer that was far worse IMO for college football than some of this other stuff like NIL, transfer portals, and CFP playoff expansion that we are talking about currently. A unilateral decision by the SEC followed by a unilateral decision by the B1G basically dropped 18 proud programs to second tier status without a single game on the field having anything to say about it. UCLA hasn't won the Pac-10/12 this century. In that same time period, the teams most discussed as being the first left behind by the B1G (UW, UO, Stanford) have won or shared the title 14 times. That, is a problem. Even retched Cal (who the talking heads should drop football or join join the MWC), has had a share of the title once in that time period. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/28/2022, 11:38:17 PM