early days of ESPN, ACC and ESPN were not a business model but truly relationship, they were making opportunities, seeing great events to show. They assumed the viewers would follow. but like anything Rights escalated, and when ESPN/ABC and merged with disney, there started to be factors of return on investment. the new guys were movie folks, and were not based on relationships. The same folks saw the rights things getting out of hand... (especially with pressure from traditional cable, satellite industry. Simply now ESPN managed by return on investment for entertainment, not sports. Therefore they see a better investment in funding full SEC, their drama their passion, and their huge sports industry in the sunbelt, was much better. Then they invested in getting the rights for CFB championship, and being able in content to manage the perceptions to only the SEC football is good, (because its the only sports network) or Fox who give rights to colleges. The other conferences are left taking whatever is left, (possibly in future gyrations less rights), and the schools have really no choice. Actually fox has the same mentality, with the Big 10 and Notre dame is ND. The rest hanging. and if either network see any flatlines in tTV revenue, they might push conferences for expansion. My gut all the major transactions in this phase is done, for a year or two....ESPN wants to know their investment in the SEC is worth it, and they get superior product in the expanded playoffs. Fox needs to see how this 18 team Big 10 works with an broad national football print and how does it translate into enhanced revenue. (and to the Big 10, outsourced some games to NBC/ NBC might have the margin, ND (national brand) and the Big 10 game of the week (when ND is away in ACC game. (also for ESPN, the only value of the ACC, is they get viewers when ND plays an ACC team. Real cynical, but it is . dont worry about it . the rest of us just need to work harder, be more creative on revenue streams, hire and keep top notch coaches who want to be rogue to the Big 10 for SEC, as well as type of players who want to stick it to the SEC/Big 10 programs

won't move the needle much. You are on to something though. The next big mover will be basketball. The ACC, B12, and Big East need to find a way to continue to dominate. The SEC teams are being ranked this year, prematurally in my opinion, and except for Purdue this year, the Big 10 is always overrated. Basketball could help equalize the media money differentials when the tournament is renegotiated, but it's the NCAA that is in charge of that (sigh). FSU had LSU and Florida scheduled as non conference foes, not sure you can schedule any tougher than that when the schedules are set years in advance. It's going to take scheduling tougher regular season OOC away games for both the B12 and ACC - and winning those games. The cupcake home schedules of Michigan (example) will not fly for a non P2 conference moving forward - that has been proven this year. The problem is, those top schools in the P2 will not play away games against non conference P5 schools.

break away from the NCAA tournament and hold their own invitational championship with their own network negotiations.

be interested in getting into bed with this alternative championship? I don't think the networks will be able to get into bed with both.

what are the requirements for the networks honoring it? The conferences can sign an agreement with each other to stock their own tournament first whenever those contracts expire, or just agree to pull out now if it will trigger the contracts getting torn up.

are, but I am pretty sure it is spelled out in the contracts. Given that the NCAA now owns the NIT, ESPN's contract to cover the NIT may have a clause in that prevents ESPN from entering into business which could harm the NCAA's product (March Madness and NIT). I do know that Fox Sports wanted its own postseason tournament and tried to start one for the 2022-23 season to compete against the NIT, but the NCAA stepped in to prevent it. The easiest way for the NCAA to control the situation is for a committee to not approve a tournament's request to be sanctioned by the NCAA. I am pretty sure the NCAA DI Manual has a bylaw that prevents a NCAA member from participating in an unsanctioned sporting event/tournament. If a member is caught committing such an infraction, then the penalty can be a severe one. ** Edited by VTHokie2000 at 12/3/2023, 10:22:05 PM

Pull the trigger in 2032 or get the bylaws changed with enough disaffected conferences in support. Sounds feasible. Again, the objective is for the ACC, B12 and BE to take control of the real BB money maker, which is the championships. Other conferences would be able to field teams and earn payouts, but controlling interest would be by the three conferences which have the greatest dependency on and commitment to the product.

vote the same way on an issue even if it may go against the wishes of the P2s. Basically there are enough non-P2s that the bylaws and rules so changes to the DI bylaws are to what the majority want instead of what the group with the most political influence want. Remember the various NCAA committees involved in these decisions are made up of representatives from the various schools. Each committee member serves for a specific term and their seat rotates among the schools. A third option is to decide during the NCAA re-org that the P2s form their own division level and the rest of the DI conferences remain together as a division (i.e. the new DII).

that the NCAA will not have any teeth moving forward. The NCAA does not have an antitrust exemption like the NFL, and that is why the conferences are negotiating their media deals outside of NCAA oversight. The NCAA however, can change their charter, and make it so that the current media money gap is closed, or the BIG and SEC will have to go rogue, and have THEIR own basketball tournament, baseball world series, and championships in every other NCAA sanctioned sport. Can you get the B12, ACC, and all of the other division one basketball and olympic sport conferences to sign on? Can the NCAA pre empt the College football championship if the ACC, B!@, and all G5 conferences sign on? They consolidated the top 20% of college football into two conferences, but it's my contention that the 20% can not survive without the bottom 80%. The CFP and tournament money is seperate from the media deals, so not participating in the CFP would go a long way in getting the P2's attention. Instead of waiting for them to form their own league, take preemptive action, and make that action untenable for the P2.

is which part of the NCAA are people referring to at that time. I think most people assume "NCAA" is referring to the admin piece (aka NCAA HQ) which is located in Nap Town because they assume it functions the same way as the commissioner's office for any pro league. I suspect very few people have taken the time to read the NCAA Manual (aka bylaws) for any of the 3 division levels. Many may not even know it even exists for one reason or another. If people did take the time, then they should eventually realize that the NCAA members (aka schools) structured the NCAA HQ to have as little or as much power as they desired. The structure isn't any different than how many of the pro leagues are structured assuming people read the charter and bylaws. Just because a pro league may have had a strong commissioner at various times, they naturally assume the NCAA should have just as strong of a commissioner too. Also, any time the "NCAA" makes a "decision" public, then often times the decision was made by one of the NCAA committee, which is typically made up of representatives from the various schools, and not the NCAA HQ. So when you mention "NCAA" in your post, I guess a fair question to ask is which part of the NCAA are referring to? For example, the first 3 references I am assuming you are referring to NCAA HQ. If so, then my only response is the NCAA HQ never had any teeth to begin with because that is how the members wanted it. Whereas if you are referring to the NCAA, the Members (aka the schools), then the response could go into a entirely new direction. I assumed the fourth reference (about the charter) was to the NCAA, the Members because the members are the only ones with the power to change the charter. You probably could even say they are currently going through that process now with the NCAA re-org effort. While the 5th reference (NCAA sanctioned sports) probably could go either way. I will say the NCAA bylaws (for all 3 division levels) state that the NCAA, the Organization can only recognize 1 champion per sport per division. Hence why the FCS Playoffs is officially called the NCAA DI Playoffs and the champion receives the standard NCAA team trophy. While the FBS Playoffs is not officially recognized as a NCAA sponsored tournament and the champion does not receive the standard NCAA trophy. Now the NCAA does recognize the FBS champion in its record books, but the precedence was already established when the NCAA started to include the various polls and their champions in the NCAA DI Record Books.

be about the NCAA. The Division One basketball conferences could set up their own association, with bylaws that give ever school, not the conferences the right to vote to change the bylaws. Say, a 2/3's majority to change the bylaws as they they would be set. The NCAA could do that for Division one basketball schools, or form another entity, and include baseball and all olympic sports. Currently there has been talk about seperating football from the rest of college athletics because travel is becoming an issue for non revs. Instead of letting football and the networks drive the bus, if the P2 wants to compete for college "sanctioned" championships through the NCAA (or whatever the association is named), then they would have to join. Put it right back on those fine educational institutions that have turned their back on tradition for the almighty dollar, and let them choose to be part of the association, or form their own league. Recently, the head of the B12, BIG, SEC, and ACC were in Washington, lobbying congress to set national standards on NIL, and pay for athletes. Where were the G5 conference presidents, or the division one basketball presidents? Why are they not included in that group? They already had a monopoly on the major bowl games and the playoffs, and it's time, in my humble opinion, to break up the monopoly. I'm way OK with schools getting the money for performance and ratings, but taking all of the money for the top 20% in "amature" sports is killing the goose.

people tend to interchange the different facets of the NCAA (admin side vs. member side) to where the line separating the 2 is so blurred or non-existent anymore. I guess that was a reason I decided to take the time to study the NCAA DI, DII, and DIII Manuals so I could better understand the true picture of the NCAA dynamics. Or I was glutting for punishment since the topic is a more complex one than people realize. At least I doubt very man people know the NCAA's structure is very similar to how the Senate or House is structured in Congress with its committees and to some degree subcommittees where most of the "work" tends to take place. WRT your idea, it does have the potential to work. Some details may need to be hashed out first particularly when you factor in the role and influence Title IX will have going forward. I bring that up because people have suggested that football should be treated separately from the other NCAA sports and that it shouldn't even be subject to Title IX just because of the numbers required to sponsor the sport. They may have a valid point, but it may not matter legally because the male athletes, who play the sport, are receiving an extra benefit that wouldn't be available to the women athletes. Even if the schools decided to establish an association for each specific sport, the sport would still be subject to Title IX requirements. In terms of monitoring the schools to ensure they are in compliance of said requirements, who would handle that oversight responsibility? Currently it is being handled by the NCAA (admin) in conjunction with the Department of Education and the schools (self-monitoring/self-reporting). My underlying point is if a school is a member of multiple association, then which association has the final authority in these types of decisions/issues? How would these different associations work together when it comes to the oversight? FWIW the power conferences currently don't want to share their power (and money) with the G5s. What could be interesting to see play out is how the G5s will react if/when the ACC and/or Big XII finding themselves exiled to that group as it is renamed the G7s. Will they have some serious bridge repair because their behavior and decisions as a power conference strained any relationships they had with the other conferences? Will the G5s have a large humble pie with their names on it waiting for them at the dinner table? I do wonder if things would have turned out different if the DI schools had decided back in the 70s to not create 2 subdivisions in football, but instead create a brand new division level. If they had gone that route, then in theory the NCAA (HQ) could have had better control over the postseason for all 4 division levels. I don't think it would have mattered if the postseason was bowl games or a playoff because the champion could be recognized as the NCAA champion based on the 1 champion per sport per division level bylaw.

thought out). In my thinking, the new "association" deals with ALL of the division one basketball conferences. Let's use the Atlantic 10 or Ivy League as an example. Let's also assume that the olympic sports are not only sponsored by P2 or "P5" schools. The only assumption we can make is that it is the latter "P5" schools that dominate the media deals. There are a LOT of Universities that sponsor athletics that are not associated with football media money. I know this will really set some off on this board, because if they got an invite to the SEC or BIG, they would be ecstatic. But for the sake of argument, lets say VT is left behind like many others. The basketball tournament is the only chance to take back college athletics. This is no longer a "P5", "G5", or FCS argument. This has become a college athletics argument. When was the last time you watched the rowing championship on TV? I'd say Lacrosse, but you guys are in Lacrosse territory. How about women's field hockey? You hit a valid point about title 9, and lets be clear, this is about giving the middle finger to the P2 and the disparity in the media money, as being a G5 fan of Toledo, it matters. If they want a semi pro football league, let them. The rest of us will play college ball.

pro, college, or HS. If I had to rank my favorite sports to watch in order of preference, then the list would probably look like this: 1. Football (American, Canadian, Aussie Rules) 2. Soccer 3. Basketball 4. Rugby (Union Rules) 5. Ice Hockey 6. Water Polo 7. Racquetball/Squash 8. Wrestling 9. Volleyball 10. Polo Fortunately, ESPN Family of Networks (including ESPN+) is willing to broadcast a lot of these Olympic sports at the collegiate or pro level. Surprisingly some of the collegiate broadcasts are at the club level because the sport is currently not sponsored by the NCAA. However, you are correct that most people only care about watching football, basketball, maybe baseball, and maybe softball on TV. Any interest in watching ice hockey or lacrosse on TV is probably regional given how few the number of schools that sponsor the sport at the NCAA level. Even though soccer isn't as regional as ice hockey and lacrosse, the interest in watching the sport on TV is probably at that level. Something that could help explain the TV ratings is the bulk of events are typically scheduled at times when most people are at work or school. Just imagine if ESPN decided to broadcast the Alabama vs. WVU football at 2pm on a Tuesday (non-holiday). I suspect the rating for that game would be significantly down than if the game took place in one of the more traditional college football time slots. I'm not suggesting that the ratings would be up for the Olympic sports if they scheduled the games in better time slots because this generation of adults are from the old school where football and men's basketball dominate. However, there may be more of today's youth participating in these other sports than when I was their age. I'm in my mid-40s and as a youth I played football (Fall), basketball/wrestling (Winter), soccer (Spring/Summer), and baseball (Summer). When today's youth become adults, what will be their TV interests? Will they want to watch the sports they used to play or will they want to watch the sports (i.e. football, basketball, baseball, golf, etc.) that are currently popular today?

NCAA body, it is seperate from the NCAA. Maybe they form a Basketball Championship Series, or something like that - but we are starting down the path of separating from the P2 in all sports.

What the P2 are trying to do in FB can be translated to BB as revenue sports. This needs to happen soon, as the money disparity will propagate to other sport’s competitivenesses. The good news here is that the elite conferences in MBB are predominantly not in the P2.

within the system. Now the change could come with a price because external organizations (i.e. media companies) and internal organizations (i.e. the P2s) may not like some of the changes made to the system. Likewise, there will be a price to pay if change is made outside the system. The question ultimately becomes "Are enough schools willing to pay that price?" If so, then that is when there is a possibility of real change occurring. Otherwise, it will likely be keeping with the status quo or kicking the can down the road.