Reality is that the BIG/SEC only contain 34 teams. And that includes: 14 states in BIG 12 states in SEC So 24 entire states are not in the P2. And fans from 100 FBS schools are not included in the P2 model. That is a large amount of people that they are leaving out and yet counting on still caring about and paying for the P2 teams. It's a full on gamble driven by greed and with zero consideration for the sport itself or the student athletes. IMHO, the only way it works is if they do actually separate it out and let the P2 have a national title and everyone else has a separate national title. If that's the case then I will watch wherever VT lands, and I might have rare tepid interest in the other group.

Sure, a bunch of us will still pay for ESPN channels through our cable and streaming packages ... can't help that. But I know I am alone in that if there is something to play for and my school isn't allowed to be part of it, then I am simply not interested. I don't care if Michigan wins a mythical NC that only 45 schools are allowed to compete for in the first place.

gamble on college sports, you can bet (pun intended) that people will still watch a P2 league for at least that reason. Now the people who don't gamble on college sports may not watch, but I suspect that group is in the minority. There is a reason ESPN decided to launch its streaming service with interactive gambling now and not at some point in the future. It wouldn't surprise me if at some point someone figures out a way to create a fantasy league for college sports. It would be another way to keep people interested especially the ones who currently don't bet on college sports.

gamblers, and like it or not, they don’t care about us. Look at the commercials on gambling, pizza, beer etc., they know through research, where the money is today, and they don’t care about yesterday.

It would not surprise me if at some point a state government decided to change its laws so the colleges/universities within the state can earn some addition revenue via the money generated from gambling. It would be a way for the state government to help the schools keep up with the Joneses without necessarily increasing the taxes. ** Edited by VTHokie2000 at 3/2/2024, 9:52:43 AM

in many states that were fighting it. “It’s for the kids.” 🤣

The NCAA may even run that, like they do the FCS. Whether the NCAA runs it or not, I think there are too many markets unserved to not do anything. It could likely be another TV network like CBS that does this like they do the NCAA 🏀 tournament.

All schools, P2 or otherwise, continue to reside under the NCAA umbrella (okay, maybe, maybe not), but the P2 when it comes to football have their own set of rules and a separate playoff administered and controlled by the CFP/ESPN/whoever. The rest of college football finally has what has never existed: a Division 1A playoff administered and controlled by the NCAA. But my thinking on this kind of stuff is pretty simplistic compared to those of you who spend a lot of time pondering it.

(i.e. DI-FCS and DI-FBS), then it will require a change in the NCAA's overall bylaws. Not just the DI bylaws which means enough DII and DIII schools will need to support the change. The bylaw I am referring to the NCAA is only allowed to award/sponsor 1 championship per sport per division level. Hence why the DI-FCS Playoffs is officially considered the NCAA DI Football Playoffs and awarded the standard NCAA team trophy. While the FBS Playoffs is named something different and the champion awarded a different trophy. It also explains why the NIT name has remained the same even though the tournament is officially owned by the NCAA. I am not saying the change can't be done, but it may require the DI schools giving something to the DII and DIII schools in exchange for their support. If a trade is not possible, then I guess it leaves the DI schools with 2 options. Option 1 is to create a tournament that is ran by the NCAA, but operates under a different name like what you see with the NIT and NWIT. Option 2 is to recombine the DI-FBS and DI-FCS so everyone can participate in the NCAA DI Football Playoffs. There is a possibility that Option 1 isn't legally possible or at least it could explain why the DI-FBS schools didn't go that route when they decided to create the CFP. For example, the group that runs the NIT could be considered a separate group from the NCAA or even a subsidiary to the NCAA which could explain how the DI schools are able to get around that bylaw.

think we will. ESPN has been treating us well the last month or so, that’s a great sign. I was hoping the Virginia Carolina 4 were headed to the SEC, I know John Skipper wanted his Alma mater with ESPN, and they want to take UVA with them. I still hope all 4 go to the SEC, but the winds are blowing 2 to the SEC and 2 to the B1G. So right now, I think Tech and State to the SEC, and UVA and UNC to the B1G mainly because the politicians have the greatest pull and won’t let Tech and State be left out. If that happens, we still need to play UVA in football and basketball, at the very minimum. Either way Will, you and TSL are good! Like I said, we are tier 2 right now, and Virginia Tech life is really good, and you Chris and the rest of the team are a HUGE part of it. THANK YOU!!🦃🦃🦃 ** Edited by Stech at 3/2/2024, 10:27:46 PM

eat it too. "We will take the lions share of media money, but we will grace you with our basketball and Olympic sports" Lets be clear - they won't be separating "football", they will be separating the money. Let them take their basketball, baseball, hockey, Olympic sports. and women's sports, and let them play bt their own rules with them as well. I'll watch another VT KU Orange Bowl any day (no offence).

to break off, nor do I think the networks want them too either. back when I had a company, the 20% brought me in 80% of the revenue, but I needed the 80% to move the 20%. Without the whole thing, our products collected dust, as consumers want the choices. The P2 needs the 80% to be viable, and at least appear to be on the same footing. The networks need all of the content, otherwise, no G5 conference would receive any media money. The P2 just wants the money and the prestige - The networks just want the most profitable business model. I just don't see a semi pro college model working for either party.

Now you have an AP article saying the same thing. Ride the wave, don’t fight IMHO.

the end, so don't place any bets on my opinions. Until it happens, I say now way. The only way the P2 would do that is if it what the networks want them to do - and I just don't see that penciling out for them.

They are hoping the rest of cfb gets scared enough to capitulate to their demands for extra playoff spots and extra money distribution. (assuming everyone stays in the current FBS model) But you are right. If the P2 is called on their bluff then the media companies would find themselves in a dilemma. The P2 is not the NFL. No amount of marketing will ever make it like the NFL. Maybe I'm overestimating the fan reaction and people will just blindly keep watching. But I imagine it will be more impactful with large sections of fans tuning out. Why watch if there is less than a 5% chance of even making the playoff for those not in the P2 (while P2 teams have a 20% chance)?

where it says 50% of the fans are from 18 teams only. Big 10/SEC/ESPN/Fox eats this garbage stuff up. Media guys Patrick Crates and Bob Thompson as well as CFP chairman Bill Hancock have all given interviews where they believe the regular college football fan will still watch the SEC and Big 10 league only. I don't agree and I certainly won't ever. I read a lot of college forums and the near unanimous response is that if their school is excluded from competing at the top level, they will watch their school only and that is it. ** Edited by HouClone at 3/1/2024, 1:45:23 PM

responses on his past posts. I have criticized him a lot though in forums.

The same set of data can be used to tell multiple stories (which often conflict). And far too often it is purposeful in selecting data views that support a predetermined narrative. I personally much prefer collecting raw data and then seeing if the data has any insights when you look at it from different angles and combinations. If I had the raw data, I would want to start with the numbers week by week for each year. Then I would see how the data looks for the following: - What does viewership look like on week 1 vs week 10 vs bowl season (since he includes bowl viewers in his data which skews the numbers). - What do the numbers show for just games between noon-3:30 kickoff when there are more options for games? - What do the numbers show for just later games that kickoff after 4pm EST when there are fewer options? - What do the numbers show for just games on a major network? (NBC, CBS, FOX, ESPN) - Compare numbers for just the non-major network games. - What are viewer numbers in relation to record of teams? If a team has an avg/bad record but still lots of viewers then that would be a strong brand. That's the kind of data that would actually be useful. If anyone knows where to get the raw data I'd love to take a look.

student-athlete model. Not interested in the P2. Go ahead and get it over with and leave!

** Edited by daveinop at 3/1/2024, 8:09:37 AM

in the negotiations of the CFP extension, but it feels as though there’s two conferences that are trying to stack the deck vs. everyone else, and that’s potentially going to create a competitive inequity that I don’t think is good.,” TCU athletic director Jeremiah Donati told reporters Wednesday before the latest news about a 3-3-2-2-1 model was even reported. “I don’t think it’s good for college football.” Objections might not matter. The Big Ten and SEC hold all the leverage. They could very well cut the rest of college football out altogether, do their own playoff and keep all the money — instead of most it, which is what they want. ——————————————————————— Most important thing said in the article. Just another way of saying we are leaving the NCAA like the article I originally posted. I think expansion will be done so in 2026 they are doing their own thing. Expect the old line, don’t say we didn’t warn you. Or we tried to work with you. The freight train has left the station IMHO. ** Edited by Stech at 3/1/2024, 9:25:47 AM

are NFL. For college, I'm just as likely to watch Fresno State play UNLV as I am Mississippi State against Auburn. I may not be the typical viewer but I'm hardly the lone ranger. 35 (incl ND) teams don't play enough games to fill all of the time slots on multiple networks, so there will be competing games for every game the P2 puts on the air...and I'm NEVER going to watch at least a third of the teams they already have unless they are playing UF or LSU where my family has rooting interests. NIL and playing time levels the playing field for recruiting and transfers. There are very good players who won't be in the P2. And what if the NCAA adopted some/all of the Canadian rules to make it more exciting? Then it's even a slightly different product. If they broke from the NCAA right now and the remaining NCAA members cut them off, they'd be rejoining by 2031. Their ratings would parallel NASCAR. I don't think they are going anywhere unless the breakaway is 70-80 schools...that's enough coverage and diversity of interests to prosper.

I guess we see, because more and more the articles about them leaving are coming out.

Because if it's 48, I think VT is in. 44, not so sure. 40, nope. That said, even if VT doesn't make the P2, I think most Hokie fans will keep watching, going to, and enjoying the games. As a guy who runs a business that covers VT athletics, I certainly hope that's true, at least.

Or have you ever war gamed senarios about VT sports and the potential impacts (negative and positive) to TSL? Have you built a book of ideas that could be implemented by TSL? This would be everything from simple organic growth (like your podcast studio) to crazy concepts that may not be practical but would be profitable and/or fun. Or have you looked at expansion or acquisition opportunities? Perhaps you have done some or all of the above at some point. But if you ever want to explore these kinds of things, just ask the boards. I can help not speak for me, but I imagine there are many here who would offer some free consulting services using our variety of backgrounds. I know we have media people here. And lawyers and marketers and sales. Personally I have a ton of experience with strategic planning, change, and process improvement. You have resources here that are available. So if you ever do worry about the future for TSL, don’t hesitate to tap into the expertise here. You can have lots of Hokie helpers if you want them.

That said, I know what I want TSL to look like, and how I want its continued evolution to look. I typically come up with a few initiatives each year, and 2024 has its set of goals. But I typically don't plan out more than 1-2 years. For example, I didn't "plan" on hiring Andy, although we were prepared for it when he became available. And that transformed the business, leading to the next set of goals and plans. And so on. It's worked for over 25 years, which is pretty long in internet terms.

Fans love an upstart…

... to free up TV viewing in the fall. They have, with espn's help, turned the 4 team playoff into an invitational. Now they are trying to do the same with the 12 team playoff. Beginning to look like I've wasted a lot of time when I could have done long RV trips visiting the national parks in the fall.

Heck, I might enjoy the 2nd group regular season/playoffs better.

they need to meet but they are also posturing; their first offer was 4 guaranteed spots for each. now it's down to 3. if they really want to break away so bad, why any discussion at all? and if they are all that good, they should want to stick with the top 5 champs and make all the rest at large. AP won't be the last to notice the obvious...they want CFP to be the NIT. and I think most of the ACC and Big 12 would need to be in the break away...or they come up with sideboards for membership and anyone who qualifies can get in. all it takes is one senator or rep on the wrong committee for life to become hell for the monopoly of non-profits ** Edited by daveinop at 3/1/2024, 3:38:50 PM

As far as I'm concerned, the SEC/Big 10 can just do unspeakable things to themselves.

Add ND to get to 35, then another 13 teams to get to 48 (nice even number for playoffs). This would be the bare minimum needed to make a true P2 work and not piss off too many schools/states. Pick up new states by getting schools from: NC VA CO UT AZ KS WV and then picking who they want from existing states KY, FL, GA, SC, TX, CA, OK, OH would be the most likely. But how to balance the need to grow with the greed and desire to hoard cash among existing teams?

According to sources, the model that's earned the most discussion coming out of the CFP meeting in Dallas is one that would include three automatic qualifier spots for the Big Ten and SEC, two for the Big 12 and ACC and one for the Group of Five. That would leave three at-large spots in that 14-team model. So basically the B12 and ACC get two bids in total, with each P2 conference getting 3 each, and one G5 slot leaving three "at large" spots, which may or may not be filled with SEC or B1X schools. Basically that means the ACC and B12 get nothing more than the original arrangement of 1 each, but the P2 get 4 additional automatic bids. Not a good deal for anyone other than the P2.

The guaranteed bids are: SEC = 3 B10 = 3 ACC = 2 B12 = 2 OTH = 1 ---------- AUTOMATIC TOTAL = 11 AT LARGE = 3 ---------- TOTAL = 14 That frankly sounds pretty sweet. Would the Big12, without Texas and Oklahoma really likely to have 2 teams ranked in the top 14? I seriously doubt it. Is the ACC going to have 2 teams in the top 14? That's certainly possible, but it's just as likely they wouldn't. I think it's a near certainty that 3 from the B10 will be in the top 14 every year anyway, when you have OSU, MICH, PENN ST, WASH, ORE, USC, WISC, UCLA, etc. Same that the SEC is a near certainty to have 3 when you have GEORGIA, LSU, TEXAS, OKLAHOMA, TENNESSEE, FLORIDA, ALABAMA, AUBURN. Take the deal in my opinion. ** Edited by jesuisvtguy at 3/1/2024, 9:02:21 PM

They are throwing out the bait of 3 P2 AQs, and 2 ACC/B12 AQs just to get the ACC to agree with multiple AQs in principle. Then the switch comes. Perhaps 4 and 1. I'm just against AQs for non-champions. Period. Just bad form.

where their teams beat up on each other and even the better teams have multiple losses. In that same year the are several higher ranked ACC/Big12 teams with better records that get hosed. ** Edited by Tuckahokie at 3/1/2024, 6:21:44 AM

Reality is that in 10 playoffs, the SEC has had 12 teams get in. 8 are Alabama 3 UGA 1 LSU and no he can't count Texas or OU since they were not SEC at the time. So he is trying to justify getting multiple playoff spots off of the results from one dominant program and by including the new schools who were not SEC teams when they made the playoff. It's misleading and he knows it. ** Edited by HokieAl at 3/1/2024, 9:20:55 AM

as seen by FSU being moved out of the way for Texas and Alabama. Total fraud. The committee being in the tank for them isn't enough for them and ESPN. They want guaranteed slots. So lame. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 3/1/2024, 11:06:02 AM

maybe they are - but there are a 100+ Universities that may have a different take. It's why they are threatening to break away - but I think that is a bluff. I don't think the networks want any such thing, as they already have the content, and the viewers. Unless they think they can get more viewers than they have now, the P2 will have to deal with the rest of division 1 ball, whether they like it or not. I'm not convinced that viewership will be significantly better with two conferences. The P2 already have the money, power, and competitive advantage. They may be overplaying their hand.

is a good idea. In other words, no one is more enthusiastic about the direction of the sport. So, I'd say they are a lot closer to killing the golden goose than they are making it the largest money maker in global athletics.

much money flows in the gambling of college sports. They may even have the data on which conferences and/or schools see the most action. It is possible the data is telling them that people will still watch a P2 league for that very reason or the drop off would be insignificant if the P2 did end up doing their own thing. Plus, there are people out there who don't gamble on sports, but do participate in a fantasy league. If someone ever figures out a way to do fantasy leagues for college sports, then that could be another way to keep people interested in a P2 league.

they will make more by not breaking away. A 48 team league (or whatever the number) would have to have revenue sharing across the board, and the schools athletic budgets are not close to being equal in the P2. They would have to completely transform the business model to a more NFL type of model. The problem with that is that the NFL doesn't support basketball, baseball, women's sports, and Olympic sports. Do you think for one second that everyone will stand back, and let them take their football and go home, yet allow all the other sports to compete with the rest of the nation? I think it's a bluff to get more playoff money.

DI basketball revenue is being shared with the DII and DIII schools, I do think the P2s will make more money if they go their own way. It is likely the additional CFP money you think the P2s want is pennies to the money they would get by not sharing the football and basketball money.

in any sport after that.

If the ACC was to have 2 AQs, and had conference rules where the lion's share of the playoff payouts went to those 2 schools, is it enough to change the dynamics , maybe not for fsu, but for Clemson UNC VT Miami etc to be okay with the ACC? All in the numbers obviously.

I also want ND out They can join F$U in Hell.

were going to the MAC, I read where the A10 teams that make the tournament keep 75% of the money, and share 25% with the conference. I had never seen any conference that divided the post season money like that, and was the driver for UMass not joining the MAC in all sports in 2011 (not sure of the date). Uneven distributions in the post season may be the way to go with the Mag 7, and keep the ACC as it is.

can enjoy what college football used to be and once was.

miss either conference !

athletes need the big money from the revenue sports to support them. It’s why I hope Tech and UVA are in the P2, preferably together. Rivalries matter and IMHO make a great reason to socialize around them. I’m particularly talking about the nonrevenue sports. Even though it’s on a smaller scale, they bring something special to the state of Virginia IMHO.

began. If there are, let's say, 40 Power 2 members from the Big 20 and SEC 20, and Tech and UVA get left behind along with all the other ACC schools except for FSU, Clemson and Miami and less likely UNC, would the ACC (with Tech, UVA, Pitt, Cuse, BC, Louisville, Wake, Duke, NC State, GA Tech, Stanford, Cal, SMU and let's add UConn, Tulane and USF or San Diego State ...) have enough TV money to continue to support all their non-revenue sports? Non-Power 4 schools like JMU and UConn have been able to so. My question is will the SEC and Big 18 play all their non-revs in the NCAA and play football and possibly men's and women's basketall in their new P-2 athletics association? Will the NCAA allow the P-2 schools to even play NCAA member schools? I can't see G-5's from P-2 states going for this since they depend and make money off their P-2 state school rivals (big pay day football games in September, filling the home basketball arena to watch their big time schools like Bama play UAB or Ohio State play Ohio U. Leaving behind the NCAA won't be as easy as the SEC and Big 10 think it will be. I expect things will get messy politcally at the state level.

now, but it’s all going to get a whole lot harder financially.

Charter. But if the university presidents say "f*** academics and tradition" and jump on board, that is a monumental failure of the NCAA. In fact it may be one of the greatest institutional failure in recorded history.

last time !

athletes. Our Men’s Golf Team GPA was over a 3.6, last semester, there are many other nonrevs that do the same. I hope we don’t ruin that.

But I'll admit that I'm shocked its happening so quickly. I figured we'd get to limp along for another decade or so.

things out there to try to make the middle seem plausible, but lately they are just steam rolling things and nothing seems to be able to stop them. I just don’t see the leverage outside of the P2. PS One indicator for me has been none of Mag 7 criticizing FSU. Sometimes it’s what you don’t say that says more.

is about to hit an iceberg or more likely get sunk by a a missile launched by a Power 2 submarine. Only 4 to 14 on the USS NCAA will survive the attack and be rescued by the Power 2 life rescue ship. ;)

24 in each with each conference having 4 PODs of 6. The rest of college football becomes 2nd tier. (which in many ways they already are)

(Note: this post was just to state how the 3 conferences would remain - however, I kept going with how play-offs would work and it started to get confusing - I almost didn't post, but I took too much time on it not to - enjoy) If the ACC would be no more...thus, ND reluctantly joins a conference fully due to travel/scheduling of non-revs. Big Ten gets FSU, Miami, Georgia Tech, Cal, & Stanford from the ACC (along w/ ND). SEC grabs VT, UVA, UNC, NC St, Clemson, & Pitt from the ACC as well as WVU and Kansas from the Big 12. The Big 12 grabs the 5 remaining ACC schools (Syr, BC, Wake, Duke, & SMU). All three leagues agree to get to 24 and have 4 Pods of 6. Thus, the Big 12 picks up UConn, Boise St., Wash St., Oreg St., & Tulane. Some of the pick-ups from the SEC are driven by regional rivalries to pop better TV numbers in certain areas (i.e. WVU-Pitt & Kan-Mizzou). They decide to play an 8-game regular season in these 3 conferences. 5 against pod members and one team in the other pods in your conference. You play one game each against the other two conferences as well as one against a remaining "FBS or FCS" team (through in the last part to ensure everyone at least gets 6 home games). If they want to stay inclusive, then they either go to a 9-game conference schedule where each team has a rival outside their pod in-conference or a 2nd game against one of the other two conferences. One last option is just play all 11 games in-conference - 5 in your pod and 6 of another pod (2 pods are put together rotating each season) - however, probably not an option since half the teams would have 5 home games. The play-offs go to 16 teams - the SEC and Big Ten get 6 teams each (4 pod leaders plus 2 at-large if they go with my 8 game conf sched, w/ 2 +1). Here, it would have to be determined if the Big 12 gets 3 and they throw a bone to the remaining conferences with a spot or just give all 4 to the Big 12 (though the committee picks, not pod winners guaanteed). Let's say they split from the NCAA and just give the B12 4 spots. However, everyone would play a 12th game - Pod winners vs each other - 2nd place teams in pods play against each other - rotating each year which pods play whoever. There would be a championship week - The Big Ten and SEC Champs get the top two seeds - Big 12 champ gets #3. The committee decides on how the rest of the seeds go (plus determine 1 & 2 seeds). The first two rounds are played at the better-seed's home field (let's throw in the semis to make the conference champ games mean a little more since there aren't any byes). The champ game is played at a neutral site. If you don't make the quarterfinals, you can play bowl games - if they want to keep them around. In today's game, I would still choose for bowl games to be the 1st game of the following season, but in this set up, maybe only big bowls remain (the NIT for college football). Big Ten Pod 1 Michigan Ohio St Penn St. Mich St. Indiana Purdue Big Ten Pod 2 FSU Maryland Rutgers Notre Dame Miami GT Big Ten Pod 3 USC Oregon UCLA Wash Stanford Cal Big Ten Pod 4 Minn Neb Wisc Iowa N'west Illinois SEC Pod 1 Alabama Auburn LSU Ole Miss Miss St. Vandy SEC Pod 2 Florida S Car Clemson Tenn Kentucky Georgia SEC Pod 3 Texas Tex A&M Oklahoma Arkansas Mizzou Kansas SEC Pod 4 Pitt WVU VT UVA UNC NC St. B12 Pod 1 Utah Boise St. Ariz Ariz St. Wash St. Oreg St. B12 Pod 2 Syr BC Wake Duke Cincy UConn B12 Pod 3 Houston TCU Baylor SMU UCF Tulane B12 Pod 4 Iowa St. Kan St BYU Colorado Okl St. Tex Tech

from everyone else. They just want to control things and take most of the money. They did not like having to compromise with The PAC 2. They do not like having to negotiate equally with the little conferences. I think they could form a new regulatory body with just the two of them at first. Then they will invite the G5's, perhaps The Big XII. They will conspicuously exclude the troublesome PAC 2 and the stubborn ACC. Notre Dame will be on the naughty list as well. They will graciously invite the leftovers to join after the rules, and hierarchy are established. Guidance will be provided to any schools who can't find their assigned seat.

They simply are not going to divide the pie by 48. It is at 34 now they may grow to 40 before they begin kicking teams out.

amount of power. They will make CFB into what they desire or take their ball and leave.

They need way more than 34 teams to pull off an exit...maybe they can add collegiate stock car racing, too