Conference Realignment

[Zuckerkorn]

31 minutes ago, rico said:

Who are we really kidding?  The B1G/Big 10 has struggled in football on the national stage my entire lifetime.  And that dates back to 1967.  JMHO

Exactly.  There have been many seasons when there were several quality teams in the big ten, but only occasionally one that was worthy of NC discussion.

[rico]

Just now, Zuckerkorn said:

Exactly.  There have been many seasons when there were several quality teams in the big ten, but only occasionally one that was worthy of NC discussion.

How many of those "great" Michigan/Ohio St. teams went out to Pasadena and got curb stomped?  

[btownqb]

5 minutes ago, Zuckerkorn said:

Exactly.  There have been many seasons when there were several quality teams in the big ten, but only occasionally one that was worthy of NC discussion.

Essentially... OSU is the only program that is a player at the national level. 

Michigan and Penn St are big time names, but I have yet to see them be a true threat since Brian Griese was playing QB and even then they didn't win an actual NC game. 🤷‍♂️

They're excellent programs, but they aren't producing at a high level. Or certainly not at the level the 2-4 teams in the SEC are. 

[rico]

11 minutes ago, btownqb said:

Essentially... OSU is the only program that is a player at the national level. 

Michigan and Penn St are big time names, but I have yet to see them be a true threat since Brian Griese was playing QB and even then they didn't win an actual NC game. 🤷‍♂️

They're excellent programs, but they aren't producing at a high level. Or certainly not at the level the 2-4 teams in the SEC are. 

I just look at my lifetime(54 years) and we have what, 2 B1G teams that have won a title?  And just a few titles at that.  I compare that to the SEC and off the top of my head I come up with 'Bama, Auburn, LSU, Tennessee, Florida, and Georgia.  Those are original members there.  Just in my lifetime.  

[Sea Turtle]

10 minutes ago, rico said:

I just look at my lifetime(54 years) and we have what, 2 B1G teams that have won a title?  And just a few titles at that.  I compare that to the SEC and off the top of my head I come up with 'Bama, Auburn, LSU, Tennessee, Florida, and Georgia.  Those are original members there.  Just in my lifetime.  

So we're counting Georgia in 1980?

Can we count Penn State 1986? 

Miami and Florida State and their 8 national championships since 1983 for the ACC?  I think Pitt won one too with Marino or Dorsett. ND for 1988 as partial ACC as well? And yes I know, there has been realignment since those titles.

Yes, the SEC is doing very well and the playoff has been very good for them. Every school literally has a bag man.(read the bag man article) It pays very well to visit there. Even better to commit.

[IUCrazy2]

7 minutes ago, Sea Turtle said:

So we're counting Georgia in 1980?

Can we count Penn State 1986? 

Miami and Florida State and their 8 national championships since 1983 for the ACC?  I think Pitt won one too with Marino or Dorsett. ND for 1988 as partial ACC as well? And yes I know, there has been realignment since those titles.

Yes, the SEC is doing very well and the playoff has been very good for them. Every school literally has a bag man.(read the bag man article) It pays very well to visit there. Even better to commit.

Your last paragraph is something I was thinking too, I think OSU is one of the few BIG programs in football to embrace that SEC culture as well.  I think the "bag man" culture is going to give way to the NIL culture and that should level the playing field back to the historic programs who have not been performing historically lately but have the big fanbases.  Notre Dame and Michigan are two programs that could really improve themselves in that regard.

Additionally, I know football is king now but I could see its popularity wane over the next few decades with the injury issues the sport has.

[MSHoosier]

3 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

Your last paragraph is something I was thinking too, I think OSU is one of the few BIG programs in football to embrace that SEC culture as well.  I think the "bag man" culture is going to give way to the NIL culture and that should level the playing field back to the historic programs who have not been performing historically lately but have the big fanbases.  Notre Dame and Michigan are two programs that could really improve themselves in that regard.

Additionally, I know football is king now but I could see its popularity wane over the next few decades with the injury issues the sport has.

Hope you are right about leveling the playing field, but frankly I don't see it because down here in the SEC where I live they take it to another level investing in their athletes.

[Sea Turtle]

I forgot the Big 12. They have had 4 teams win multiple titles since the 1990's.

Nebraska

Oklahoma

Texas

Colorado

Again, realignment has occurred but you get the picture.

 

 

 

[btownqb]

27 minutes ago, Sea Turtle said:

So we're counting Georgia in 1980?

Can we count Penn State 1986? 

Miami and Florida State and their 8 national championships since 1983 for the ACC?  I think Pitt won one too with Marino or Dorsett. ND for 1988 as partial ACC as well? And yes I know, there has been realignment since those titles.

Yes, the SEC is doing very well and the playoff has been very good for them. Every school literally has a bag man.(read the bag man article) It pays very well to visit there. Even better to commit.

Yeah the PSU title doesn't count a lick. We aren't naive enough to believe cheating only goes on in the south right? 

Edited July 31, 2021 by btownqb

[btownqb]

1 minute ago, Sea Turtle said:

I forgot the Big 12. They have had 4 teams win multiple titles since the 1990's.

Nebraska

Oklahoma

Texas

Colorado

Again, realignment has occurred but you get the picture.

 

 

 

I gave you a conference that won a title by 4 separate teams in the last 15 years and you are bringing this up... 

Cherry picked stats. Using a NC by Colorado to help your argument and me not being able to use LSU because "they catch a QB in a bottle" or whatever that means. 

LSU has 3 titles since 2002. The B1G has 3 total since 1997. 

[btownqb]

9 minutes ago, MSHoosier said:

Hope you are right about leveling the playing field, but frankly I don't see it because down here in the SEC where I live they take it to another level investing in their athletes.

Without question. 

[rico]

28 minutes ago, Sea Turtle said:

So we're counting Georgia in 1980?

Can we count Penn State 1986? 

Miami and Florida State and their 8 national championships since 1983 for the ACC?  I think Pitt won one too with Marino or Dorsett. ND for 1988 as partial ACC as well? And yes I know, there has been realignment since those titles.

Yes, the SEC is doing very well and the playoff has been very good for them. Every school literally has a bag man.(read the bag man article) It pays very well to visit there. Even better to commit.

No, Penn St. does not count.  They were not in the conference at the time.

Now the "independents" did very well back before conference alignment took hold.  Notre Dame, Penn St., Pitt(Dorsett, Cavanaugh was the QB), Florida St., and Miami.

[Sea Turtle]

1 hour ago, btownqb said:

Yeah the PSU title doesn't count a lick. We aren't naive enough to believe cheating only goes on in the south right? 

Not institutionally.

[rico]

1 minute ago, Sea Turtle said:

Not institutionally.

It just doesn't count.  You gonna count everything Nebraska?

[btownqb]

27 minutes ago, Sea Turtle said:

Not institutionally.

Are you still trying to convince me UF, UGA, and LSU aren't top 10 programs along with OSU, Oklahoma, Clemson, ND, Bama, USC, and Oregon? 

Hell Auburn and TexAM would be in the Top 15. 7 of the 15 programs in the country in one conference... not even counting absolute sleeping GIANTS in Tennessee and Texas. 

[rico]

17 minutes ago, btownqb said:

Are you still trying to convince me UF, UGA, and LSU aren't top 10 programs along with OSU, Oklahoma, Clemson, ND, Bama, USC, and Oregon? 

Hell Auburn and TexAM would be in the Top 15. 7 of the 15 programs in the country in one conference... not even counting absolute sleeping GIANTS in Tennessee and Texas. 

Hmmmmm

Dated article....

https://lastwordonsports.com/collegefootball/2020/03/06/top-25-college-football-blue-bloods/

[btownqb]

8 minutes ago, rico said:

Hmmmmm

Dated article....

https://lastwordonsports.com/collegefootball/2020/03/06/top-25-college-football-blue-bloods/

9 of the top 19

[rico]

15 minutes ago, btownqb said:

9 of the top 19

Actually, I was surprised Arkansas wasn't on that list.

[btownqb]

46 minutes ago, rico said:

Actually, I was surprised Arkansas wasn't on that list.

South Carolina before them. 

[rico]

36 minutes ago, btownqb said:

South Carolina before them. 

No.  USCe is barely above .500.  They weren't squat until they joined the SEC.  

[5fouls]

Someone has spent too much time underwater.  

[dgambill]

7 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Someone has spent too much time underwater.  

Anyone that argues with him may have also swallowed too much salt water lol. But continue on if you enjoy it. 🤪

[btownqb]

15 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Anyone that argues with him may have also swallowed too much salt water lol. But continue on if you enjoy it. 🤪

It's a lot better than talking about what "4 man" IU fans think is going to play the 3 this year lol 

[rico]

28 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Someone has spent too much time underwater.  

Huh?

[olsontex]

This is an interesting conversation (historical relative strength of different conferences, national championships) but how much do you think it matters in the context of conference realignment? 

I'm assuming this prestige would translate into the SEC dominating the other conferences in terms of current recruiting classes, and the Big 10 would be behind several other conferences as well.  After all, OSU is the only legitimate title contender we've had for quite a while.  Right?

From my perspective, the distribution of the 2022 recruiting classes doesn't reflect this assumption.  Sure the SEC is in a class by themselves on the field and the top dog in recruiting, but it falls a little short of dominance over the Big 10 in the recruiting landscape.  The gap does widen though when you look at the SEC top-to-bottom. 

Something interesting is revealed when you remove the Top 20 recruiting classes and then compare conferences.  Here are the average recruit ratings for the Power 5:  86.22, 86.23, 86.06, 87.51, and 87.59.  The first 3 conferences are virtually identical (attractiveness to recruits is identical for 2nd and 3rd tier Power 5 schools in these conferences.).   The second 2 conferences are a step ahead and also virtually identical.  Do you know which conferences are in each of these two buckets?

Bucket 1:  ACC, Big 10, Big 12 (if you prefer the average total points as a gauge they are:  141.13, 140.58, and 140.30)

Bucket 2:  PAC 12 and SEC

I don't want to repeat it over and over again but prestige/appeal/marketability doesn't necessarily correlate to actual football success.  Consider Notre Dame's 33 year championship drought.  How about their W-L record over the 22 year period of recruiting rankings? That would be an average of W 8.0 - L 4.5 and includes 6 seasons failing to post a winning record.  It also includes 11 seasons failing to even finish in the Top 25 and a mere 4 Top 10 seasons.  If I hadn't mentioned "Notre Dame" would you look at these results and think "now there's an elite program!"?  There's no standard formula for looking at a range of 20+ years and pinpointing a combined ranking but this looks to be around the #15-18 ranking range to me.  So how has this decent but not great track record impact Notre Dame's athletic program annual revenue or their ability to recruit at a high level?  Their $170M revenue and $19M profit both ranked 6th in college sports last year, as it is year-in-year-out.  With 20 Top 15 and 12 Top 10 recruiting classes over this period they are clearly recruiting at an elite level.  If I used Texas as my example you'd see something fairly similar.

This isn't a tail wagging the dog situation, it's not because "They're Notre Dame".  They're "Notre Dame" because they have a large and influential national fan base who have achieved wealth and power, resulting in ND being one of the highest endowment receivers in the country.  Hmm... maybe education does play a role in all this after all.  Hint:  if the AAU sticking point seems like a dumb rule, consider that research and education endowments absolutely dwarf athletic revenue streams.  The leaders of Big Ten institutes aren't being nerdy, they're actually being just as greedy as the SEC, just along a different pathway to a much bigger pie.  That's why Stanford and Cal Berkeley are particularly appealing... and why Oklahoma State's excellent Wraslin' program, 187th ranked academic profile, and lack of AAU affiliation is not.

OK, so prestige and national exposure drive recruiting, and schools gain prestige and exposure largely as a result of their affiliation with a conference that's secured a national TV footprint (this is a large reason the PAC 12 led by USC is quite open to Big 10 proposals - they're current appeal is viewed as only regional).  Yes, winning matters too but it devolves into a chicken and egg circular argument in a hurry.  So if the Notre Dame example is true for most schools, then there must be a high correlation between annual athletic department revenue, recruiting success, and the level of a school's attractiveness to conferences in this realignment age.   Key to all of this is a large fan base with disposable income, and that trumps even the relative success on the field.  Advertiser dollars reach their target whether your team wins or loses... as long as you keep watching your lovable loser's games.  

So, about that correlation.  Don't let your eyes trick you into seeing a bunch of miss-matched colors resulting from the thinly sliced tiers.  Keep in mind the full population of this report is over 230 schools with close to 200 of them falling into the white shaded "Outside 45".  With that in mind, simply have both a revenue and recruiting rank shaded inside the Top 45 indicates correlation, and the closer the shades the higher correlation.  There are only two schools outside the Top 45 2022 recruiting classes with revenue inside the the Top 45, and vice-versa.  

 Given how much I've written, and the fact that the conclusion from all this should be pretty apparent, I don't think anyone wants/needs me to tie a bow around a summary highlighting the implications for realignment.  If you need me to, let me know and I will.