Will "acceptance" be a factor in P2 expansion?
I don't think the P2 expansion can be only about which schools increase the pie so much that it doesn't shrink the average per school. At this point, only ND might do that. If the networks are pouring in so much money, there has to be ACCPETANCE by the public that the P2 is the "Premier League".
I think that's why Clemson, FSU, UNC (for the Jordan brand) and maybe Miami get considered. Adding them will not increase the total pie enough to justify it. But it will increase the level of acceptance. If left out, a third league with these schools may have legit contenders.
The next step for acceptable is inclusion based on demographics. IMHO, that's where VA and NC are big untapped markets. Lots of eyeballs there to leave out. And make no mistake, fans bases for schools left out will have little interest in the P2 games of the week. This is where I'm hoping the P2 powers take a hard look at VT. Adding only uva does not really deliver VA for football. Hoo fans don't tune in to the football team anywhere close to how Hokie fans do. VT will be the dominant force in the football market wherever they land. It would not be smart to leave VT out.
I'm probably being too optimistic. I can see wazzou and the beavs being left out because Oregon and Washington are the dominant teams in their state. Same for Wake, Duke and even NCSU (tho I hope they make it in). PSU > Pitt. UGA > GT. UK > L'ville. OU > OSU. Texas > TT and Baylor. It may not bode well for these schools for inclusion. But there is no universe where uva > VT in football. It would be like including Pitt and leaving out PSU and thinking that covers PA.
47 Replies
2y
football and get gobs of money. Second, the P2 will look to drop "undesirables" creating a system where the bottom 3-4 schools in each conference are dropped annually and the top 3-4 schools from non-P2 will be invited to play. This will be an ongoing thing to ensure that schools worthy of the P2 are always in the P2.
So if I'm Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Indiana, Illinois ... schools that are perpetually bad, I'd be very concerned that their seats aren't as firm as they may currently feel they are.
(In response to this post by gman86)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
I see unequal distribution happening decades before they start dropping schools...and I don't think that has happened with either P2 conference to date.
(In response to this post by HokieToph)
2y
off to form a new league. In order for that to happen, the NCAA would get anti trust, and force revenue sharing. The P2 has already achieved what they set out to do except for a few puzzle pieces in some good markets.
They have nothing to gain by forming a new league.
(In response to this post by HokieToph)
S
Stech
2y
lot of money if they break off like John Skipper the former President of ESPN and Bob Thompson the former CEO of Fox Sports both said. Those guys have unbelievable connections, and they aren’t just spit balling their opinion.
** Edited by Stech at 3/29/2024, 2:22:40 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
is currently controlled by the NCAA. They would have to start their own 'private" tournament to flex their power. In other words, they would have to separate from the NCAA to change the distribution structure, and that may happen down the line if they form a new league, but I'm not at all convinced that is what the P2 or the Networks want.
As long as the NCAA still exists, the tournament distributions will go to the participants - AQ's however, could be tweaked, and/or, the first round which could be expanded, get a reduced share of the pie.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
don’t think they stop at football. They could just do the tournament between the Power 2 or have the winner of the Power 2 play the winner of the NCAA tournament. Either way, they would be making way more money than the current system. Also, ESPN and Fox would dictate the tournament, not the NCAA and CBS which refuses to run some of the tournament after the Masters like many want.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
all of the major media guys would be interested in bidding on that tournament. Given the recent conference media deals, and the new playoff media deal, the tournament is being grossly underpaid in my opinion.
ESPN and FOX could be outbid for that content, and if that were to happen, the media company has no incentive to give the P2 in football anything extra. The P2 will be well represented as they have most of the money to higher the coaches, recruit, and everything a large athletic budget can bring (NIL), but March Madness is the only thing holding the break away, and I do not see the rest of college athletics bowing to the football P2. There are too many non P2 bluebloods, champions, and contenders for football to take it over.
I say, not a chance in hell.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
What leverage do they have?
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
making $100M in media money? Are they going to take a less amount in playoff money? Are they going to have their own Olympic sport championships?
I think it's absolutely nuts that anyone thinks that will happen. They may break football away from college athletics at some point, but I don't think that will happen either.
I think the P2 adds a few more programs, and we are done until/unless the the payment of athletes and civil suites have run through the courts.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
There are only 50 states and some aren’t at the Power Conference level, mainly due to their population size. However, you deflected and didn’t answer the question. How are the others going to stop the P2 from breaking off, if they want substantially more money. We are potentially talking about another Billion dollars a year, or down the road, even more.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
that people watch. Very few other things on TV get people to watch Ads, and sell stuff for companies, it is a huge reason why companies are advertising live sports and not regular TV programming. The TV money is starting to come in, and they want that money too. There is no standing still on this, it’s only going to get bigger and bigger because live sports is where people watch advertisements.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
for a few more football schools. I don't think they will add basketball schools, no matter how blue blood they are, unless they bring more money than they are currently making. There just are not the same eyeballs on basketball games.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
more money. The networks pretty much own the P2 now, and will always need more money, it’s the nature of beast to grow stock prices. Like it or not, this is just another TV product, they want ratings to be able to sell Ad money etc.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
I agree—I don't think there's a promise of things being any better if they splinter off into something separate. And there's potential for creating a mess and some ill will.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
To give up each year in order to increase the acceptance by the public that the P2 is the premier League? And does anybody actually questioning that fact at this point, that they are the premiere conferences? If I'm representing Virginia Tech, I don't find that acceptance very valuable or necessary to purchase.
(In response to this post by gman86)
i am at peace with whatever happens
If we get in P2, we will be an 8-4 team forever, but I am ok with that. We could catch lightening in a bottle and Pry will always make us proud of the program.
If we get relegated, which could be the king of the midgets and that wouldn't be the end of the world.
(In response to this post by gman86)
2y
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
coaches' salaries, and all the other things athletic programs need to be successful in this era of college athletics. IIWII and I have accepted it.
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
2y
Need to be successful. But we just won't have the wins. So we would have what we need to be successful, but we just won't be winning. Just curious how you define success ? Sounds like, our teams aren't winning but look at our new buildings and other signs of success that we bought with our checks. Who needs wins anyway.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
2y
renovations (think Cassell) because the ACC's contract isn't on par with the SEC's or Big Ten. If VT was in the SEC or Big Ten, then it would see a significant increase in cash flow to help pay for things on the To Do List since donors are either unwilling or unable to cover the tab. VT takes its lumps as middle to bottom of the pack SEC (or Big Ten). The leadership should use that as motivation to ask the coaches what they think they need to be more successful in the conference. Once the leadership has that list, then they start to check them off. Assuming the leadership does its part and the coaches do their part, then eventually fans will start to see the wins on the athletic field improve. It is even possible the wins could come early for some sports.
"Success" to me isn't just about wins and loses. It also factors in who those wins and losses are against. For example, VT could go 13-0 in the ACC between now and 2099. However, if VT ends up losing to Big Ten and SEC teams at least 60% of the time, then it really doesn't matter how VT performs in the ACC. I don't expect VT to win majority of its marquee games in order to be successful. If the perception is that VT wins 50% to maybe 60% of its marquee games (both conference and OOC), then I would consider that a success. Keep in mind I do think the Big Ten and SEC are now the measuring stick in DI-FBS football. Also, I do believe there is a good possibility that the P2 will eventually end up doing its own thing. If that is the case, then VT's entire regular season schedule could be against P2 opponents which means VT won't have the luxury of relying on perception anymore. If VT wants to have "success" in a P2 League, then it will need to show it can win more games than lose over a period of time and even against opponent that are viewed as being superior because they are historic blue blood programs.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
2y
Virginia Tech would rarely win eight games in the SEC. You responded that you were okay with that because we would still be getting the money. The comment about rarely winning eight games was not suggested as a temporary thing that the money would overcome eventually, but as a continual state of existence in the SEC. We might do better than rarely winning eight. But cashing the SEC checks is not going to make us top of the SEC. Everybody else in the SEC is cashing those checks as well, and many of them have additional resources on top of that that Virginia Tech does not have. Virginia Tech would find it very difficult to push their way into the top third of the SEC, and if they manage that stay in there would be just as hard. It's not impossible. It's just unlikely, and cashing the SEC checks is not what's going to get us there.
** Edited by wwhokie1 at 3/28/2024, 11:36:17 PM
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
2y
VT will remain a stepping stone for coaches who want to move on to schools with much better resources than what VT can provide them. Plus, Hokie fans will eventually get tired of seeing VT lose and in some cases lose badly on the big stage because the teams are not in a situation to compete against a P2 opponent. At least by joining a P2 conference VT gives itself a chance to improve its programs. Plus, nothing lasts forever because even the bottom Big Ten teams and SEC teams have had successful seasons at various times. So it is silly to think that somehow VT would be the exception to that rule (if you want to even call it a rule).
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
2y
Just pointing out that many people who want Virginia Tech in the SEC have unrealistic expectations of what will happen once we get in the SEC. Most likely Virginia Tech ends up a middle of the pack SEC team. A lot of people seem to have visions of Virginia Tech competing for SEC. Championships and making it to the playoffs, because then we will have SEC money. But even with SEC payouts, Virginia Tech's athletic revenue will be in the bottom half of the SEC. There will still be a huge financial gap between Virginia Tech and the top third or so of the SEC. We may on occasion have a top team, when everything comes together. But people who are expecting 8 to 10 win seasons on a regular basis in the SEC have their eyes closed to reality. Again, I'd rather be in the P2 than not be in it. I believe I just have more realistic expectations of where we will find ourselves if we get the opportunity.
** Edited by wwhokie1 at 3/29/2024, 12:05:24 PM
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
2y
If VT starts out with 3-5 wins in the SEC, then I believe a realistic discussion should be what does VT need to be able to win 5-6 games consistently. Once that list is established, then it is up to the AD to go to work. If VT is able to achieve that goal, then the next discussion should be 6-7 wins. Once that list is established, then the cycle repeats. Next would be 7-8 wins and so on. If at some point everyone agrees that VT has hit a brick wall or reached its ceiling, then the discussion should shift to does VT have enough in place to be able to consistently maintain 6-9 wins (example purposes only)? I believe this approach should be a slow, methodical, blue collar-like approach and to be prepare that VT could have a surprising season or two along the way.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
2y
With a payroll 1/8 of the Yankees. It's not a direct correlation. Especially in the nil era. Besides, the athletic budget is $109mm. Lots of ways to generate revenue.
Players want to win. Easier path in the acc. 3 of the top 12 recruiting classes were ACC. They need to cull the herd a bit for sure.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
2y
and ACC. However, it wasn't able to have the same level of success when competing against teams outside the conference. In the NIL world the P2s have become the measuring stick for success. VT could win 10-12 games every year and all sorts of conference championships. However, if VT continues to lay eggs against Big Ten or SEC teams, then those loses will undo all the cred VT built up during the regular season. You might even see people dust off the Chokies nickname too. Remember there was a reason ESPN built the Wheel of Destiny exclusively for the ACC and none of those reasons are good. Players may want to win, but at some point even the players will grow tired of being the Buffalo Bills of college football because VT can't win enough important games.
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
2y
the best, then remaining in the ACC or joining another non-P2 conference isn't going to cut it. If VT is content to remain where it is and settle for whatever the fallout looks like, then I will still continue to cheer for VT. That will never change regardless if VT is a member of the P2 or not. Likewise, I will never change my opinion that I wished VT (and WVU) and had left the Big East (Football Conference) and joined the SEC back in the mid-90s. I say that because I will always want to see VT compete against the best and use that as motivation to always get better/evolve instead of being content to rest on its laurels. Outside of basketball and a few non-revenue sports, FSU and the Eight Dwarfs...err I mean the ACC wasn't considered to be the best in football which is the sport that defines VT's athletic identity.
Take your lumps, continue collecting those phat checks, and use that as motivation to evolve and get better. Majority of the time you will end up being better in the long run because your will won't be satisfied if you settle for something less. Unfortunately, VT had been pining for ACC membership since the birth of the ACC and that led to tunnel vision which impacted some of the decisions the leadership made over the years. Even though a decision seemed like the right one at the time, it was right for the short-term, but not necessarily right for the long-term. VT made its bed and now it is laying in it. IIWII so there's no point crying over spilled milk now.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
checks had noting to do with it.
VT can do it again, and they don't need a check for it.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
2y
they did well in either the Big East Football Conference or the ACC. However, VT had trouble maintaining that same level of success outside the conference. Some examples of what I am talking about are USC (at FedEx), Boise St (at FedEx), Auburn (Sugar Bowl), Michigan (Sugar Bowl), Stanford (Orange Bowl), Kansas (Orange Bowl), Nebraska (Orange), Alabama (2X CFA Kickoff Classic), Georgia (CFA Peach Bowl), Cal (Insight.com Bowl), and a few others along the way. When VT beat Alabama in Music City Bowl, I think even you would have to agree that Alabama was not at its A level as a program. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed the win. However, I would have enjoyed seeing VT beat an Alabama team when the program was at its A level more because it would have been a sign that VT has taken that next step as program.
So yes, VT could go on another run in the ACC or whatever future non-P2 conference VT is a member of at the time. However, if VT isn't able to be somewhat successful against P2 teams, then I am not sure it really matters what VT accomplishes in the conference because the P2 have become the measuring stick for success in DI-FBS football. Now if the P2 end up doing their own thing, then naturally that measuring stick will change.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
O
obguthr
2y
Now what did I do with my therapist's number?
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
2y
is possible a few of those games could have had a different outcome. Change a few of those outcomes and it could have sent VT down a completely different path. If VT had gone down a different path, then Hokie fans could be having different conversations about the current state of the programs and what VT's pecking order is in the current landscape. At the very least it shows the decisions VT makes today could have a huge impact on where the programs are 50 years from now.
(In response to this post by obguthr)
V
VPI 1924
2y
If Pry becomes a very good coach, he will go bye bye for more money.
(In response to this post by MrBayAreaHokie)
2y
hasn't exactly scheduled a lot of B12 teams, and we play pretty good ball in this neck of the woods.
Would love to see a game in Lane - the only time my team ever played you was in the Orange Bowl.
(In response to this post by MrBayAreaHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by VPI 1924)
V
VPI 1924
2y
My wife is from Oklahoma. We are a Okie/Hokie Family
(In response to this post by VPI 1924)
2y
SMU deal and make up the difference with donations.
(In response to this post by gman86)
T
Truthahn
2y
It seems to me that breaking away from the NCAA will be easier the more states they bring along, assuming they really want to do that.
Currently, they are missing Utah, Virginia, NC, Arizona, New York, Nevada, all of New England, etc. Any reasonably big state that is left out is a political risk to the P2. If they break off now, they will catch flak from a bunch of Senators and Govs who are left out. To break away from the NCAA they will need lots of political friends. It might be worth taking in a few more teams just to make it work.
(In response to this post by gman86)
2y
solve the politics issue because not every state will agree with the plan or be able to afford it.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
2y
And the interesting wrinkle is that VT and UVA might have fairly good connections (I'm guessing) with Federal govt politicians as well since a lot of our alumni work in and around DC. We already know the state govt in VA is willing to get involved as we saw with VT and the ACC invite.
But there will absolutely be state politicians involved since P2 exclusion can translate into very real economic impacts for their states and cities. I have no clue how much influence they will have or what they can do, but I expect at least some of them to be vocal and get their hands dirty.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
2y
In va university board of directors are political appointees and can be dismissed per the governor - there is no hearing - same with president who works for the board. Also in va all contracts have to be approved by attorney general and the general assembly has oversight. Both boards and leaders of both schools have been advised. You do not do anything unilateral. Also in va we dont have sunshine rules - so these instructions were given in closed door. But before that both schools are right and coordinating
(In response to this post by HokieAl)