Started By
Message
Are "Super Conferences" actually good for CFB?
Posted on 2/17/25 at 9:53 am
Posted on 2/17/25 at 9:53 am
Thinking about the sport long term here..
Is it actually a good thing to funnel all of the best programs (historically) into 2 or 3 leagues where they beat on each other year in and year out?
Sure, it could be fun for a bit, but is there any longevity in this type of structure?
The disparity between the Super Conferences and everyone else is going to be enormous.
Will schools like Oklahoma State or New Mexico eventually get reclassified as D2?
Is it actually a good thing to funnel all of the best programs (historically) into 2 or 3 leagues where they beat on each other year in and year out?
Sure, it could be fun for a bit, but is there any longevity in this type of structure?
The disparity between the Super Conferences and everyone else is going to be enormous.
Will schools like Oklahoma State or New Mexico eventually get reclassified as D2?
This post was edited on 2/17/25 at 10:07 am
21
Posted on 2/17/25 at 10:04 am to FAT SEXY
CFB is pretty much done.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 10:10 am to theballguy
Just because Bama hasn’t won a non-COVID year national championship since 2017 doesn’t mean CFB is done. True, everyone can openly buy players now, taking away from Bama’s historical advantage, but it’s still fun to watch the games most of the time.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 10:11 am to FAT SEXY
It would be a lot better to just have 6 or so major conferences with a balance of powers that make geographic sense.
It's what happens to anything where all the parties go for a quick money grab without much planning for the big picture.
It's what happens to anything where all the parties go for a quick money grab without much planning for the big picture.
This post was edited on 2/17/25 at 10:14 am
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:00 am to FAT SEXY
No. Several strong conferences is better for CFB.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:05 am to FAT SEXY
I would say we need at least 64 schools in play for D1.
If we did that, it would not be such a meat grinder as the SEC is right now. Plus it would still be interesting.
The networks need to set the divisions (using straight geography) or else the money schools will stick together and bogart the whole thing while playing OOC patsies and then beating each other up in conference. Sound familiar?
If we did that, it would not be such a meat grinder as the SEC is right now. Plus it would still be interesting.
The networks need to set the divisions (using straight geography) or else the money schools will stick together and bogart the whole thing while playing OOC patsies and then beating each other up in conference. Sound familiar?
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:07 am to FAT SEXY
The most watched sport in the country is between two conferences.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:09 am to wm72
As I’ve stated before, people complain about these bigger conferences but DON’T WANT more conferences (which will be created if you reduce the bigger conferences sizes).
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:12 am to FAT SEXY
The way I've looked at it for the past several years is simply through the lense of parity.
College sports are so unique, it's almost impossible to determine rank without schedule parity, for example (which we saw as an issue this season).
So a super conference would alleviate this, making it more in line with professional sports. The remaining teams could form their own league and still operate within the current system.
Conversely, many would view this sort of professionalism and loss of uniqueness as a negative (myself included).
So IMO, it's good and almost necessary at this point to alleviate the disparity from both a logical and financial perspective, but it's almost certainly bad for the amateur product of CFB as we once knew it.
Unfortunately no matter what we do, I don't think that's ever coming back.
College sports are so unique, it's almost impossible to determine rank without schedule parity, for example (which we saw as an issue this season).
So a super conference would alleviate this, making it more in line with professional sports. The remaining teams could form their own league and still operate within the current system.
Conversely, many would view this sort of professionalism and loss of uniqueness as a negative (myself included).
So IMO, it's good and almost necessary at this point to alleviate the disparity from both a logical and financial perspective, but it's almost certainly bad for the amateur product of CFB as we once knew it.
Unfortunately no matter what we do, I don't think that's ever coming back.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:14 am to FAT SEXY
Yes, it is good long term. Moves control to the producer schools. Having a commissioner, having realistic rules and regulations, yes that’s what we all wanted when you asked for a playoff.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:14 am to MtVernon
quote:
The networks need to set the divisions (using straight geography)
So you want to turn this like the NBA & base conferences on location? I saw a YT video where they wanted to redo MLB from NL/AL to East/West.
This post was edited on 2/17/25 at 11:15 am
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:15 am to southernboisb
4 conferences, 16 teams each, 2 divisions each.
It's not hard to do, but greed won't let the money schools do it. The customer has to force it. (ESPN, FOX)
There are a lot of schools with good size fan bases being left out right now, and that is costing more than just lumping up the big boys into two piles.
Plus the two piles of big boys will get boring because some of them HAVE to lose.
It's not hard to do, but greed won't let the money schools do it. The customer has to force it. (ESPN, FOX)
There are a lot of schools with good size fan bases being left out right now, and that is costing more than just lumping up the big boys into two piles.
Plus the two piles of big boys will get boring because some of them HAVE to lose.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:16 am to southernboisb
4 conferences, 16 teams each, 2 divisions each.
It's not hard to do, but greed won't let the money schools do it. The customer has to force it. (ESPN, FOX)
There are a lot of schools with good size fan bases being left out right now, and that is costing more than just lumping up the big boys into two piles.
Plus the two piles of big boys will get boring because some of them HAVE to lose.
It's not hard to do, but greed won't let the money schools do it. The customer has to force it. (ESPN, FOX)
There are a lot of schools with good size fan bases being left out right now, and that is costing more than just lumping up the big boys into two piles.
Plus the two piles of big boys will get boring because some of them HAVE to lose.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:19 am to flagshipuniversity
quote:
the protection for independent Notre Dame
What exactly is this?
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:22 am to MtVernon
quote:
4 conferences, 16 teams each, 2 divisions each.
I have been for this for a long time. This way it eliminates the “# conf. games” debate & settles “who’s the better conference?” on the field.
Also allows matchups between conferences.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:29 am to southernboisb
Some fans cry and say I don't want to watch my team play Baylor (for example...)
Well guess what - now you get to watch them play ELON (wtf), UAB, ORU, Sam Houston, Mercer, McNeese, Murray State, etc
Well guess what - now you get to watch them play ELON (wtf), UAB, ORU, Sam Houston, Mercer, McNeese, Murray State, etc
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:39 am to MtVernon
quote:
using straight geography
Well I guess A&M will have to be replaced by TCU
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:44 am to MrFantastic
Would be interesting to see what the ACC & B1G do with the West Coast schools.
Posted on 2/17/25 at 11:46 am to paperwasp
quote:
IMO, it's good and almost necessary at this point to alleviate the disparity
my problem with this is that it insinuates that we must have equitable outcomes with every program being right there at the finish line all together and remove all parity.....but why? This isn't the NFL where roughly 28-30 teams are all pretty much on an even plane with one another at the highest level of the sport. It's amateur college athletics. Ohio State isn't on teh same level as Cal, and that's perfectly fine. We don't need to forcefully remove parity.
What would have been nice in that regard is to get rid of the utterly retarded conference realingments and keep things regional. if you want to have a 6/8/12 tema playoff whatever, but at least you would have represenation from all over the country. Oregon/Utah/Stanford/UCLA/Washington in the Pac whatever, OSU/UM/PSU from the Big 10, OU/Tx/ATM/Nebraska in the Big 12, the SEC as it used to be, Clemson/FSU/Miami in the ACC. Take those 5 champs, throw in a handful of other at larges and there ya go. I don't see any logical reason to go to two 16-24 team superleagues and automatically give each of them ~4-6 playoff spots aside from money. If you want to talk "good for the sport" it completely flies in the face of what's good for the sport.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News