"Super League"

[NJCat]

Interesting development according to Mike Florio. 70 fixed spots, 10 schools subject to relegation each year. No more Conferences, just Divisions like the NFL.

Thoughts?

NFL works with college presidents to form "Super League"

Anger, denial, bargain, and depression are over.

www.nbcsports.com

There is also an article in The Atletic that speculates on the divisions:

How an 80-team, 8-division 'Super League' would've looked in 2023

How would College Sports Tomorrow's proposed setup to overhaul top-level college football have played out in 2023?

theathletic.com

 

[FeralFelidae]

Thoughts?

I don't like it.

 

[dillonpgp]

this is an attempt by the Big 12 and ACC to get more money at the expense of the B10 and SEC. Throwing a lifeline to Iowa State, Syracuse, and Cal? Never going to happen.

Frankly, a real “super league” would start by jettisoning the dead weights in the B10 and SEC and trying to cap the number between 24 and 32. It’s clear that, at the moment, schools like Ohio State, Alabama and Notre Dame aren’t ready to pull the plug on what they already have.

 

[CappyNU]

My wish would be for football to separate entirely, and for the conferences to revert to how they were in a way that made regional sense for all other sports. Though I'm sure, at this point, there's no way to undo those agreements...

 

[Jaguar 88]

They will kill off college football entirely, well Division 1A anyway. Seriously, if the B1G has any more expansions that bring in say Clemson and FSU, you might as well stick a fork in most of the original B1G members, including NU. There won't be 3 games of record "padding" anymore, so meeting the 6 game thresh hold will be a lot tougher for many non "superpowers".

 

[CatManTrue]

Interesting development according to Mike Florio. 70 fixed spots, 10 schools subject to relegation each year. No more Conferences, just Divisions like the NFL.

Thoughts?

NFL works with college presidents to form "Super League"

Anger, denial, bargain, and depression are over.

www.nbcsports.com

There is also an article in The Atletic that speculates on the divisions:

How an 80-team, 8-division 'Super League' would've looked in 2023

How would College Sports Tomorrow's proposed setup to overhaul top-level college football have played out in 2023?

theathletic.com

Alright one last post before I sign out for a while.

I told you all this “Super Conference” was on the way a couple of summers ago, yet you all mocked the Truth!

I’ll bump that one final time. Not to say I told you so but… because we all know I did. 😜

@IGNORE2 : take notes. This is how one dominates the freeloader boards.

 

[Katatonic]

Chances of the proposed Super League happening is btwn slim and none.

The people behind it have no real connection to CFB (much less the power centers of CFB) and there's a reason why only the ADs of schools like Cuse and WVU have been pushing it.

Why would B1G or SEC schools (aside from maybe the very top programs) agree to a reduced payout (much less the threat of relegation) so that certain B12 and ACC schools get a larger payout?

Much more likely is the B1G and SEC (after they acquire the top programs in the ACC) splitting off from the NCAA, altho they probably would only do that as a last resort due to all the potential blowback.

According to one study, if ND, FSU, Clemson and UNC joined the P2 - the B1G and SEC would have approximately 75% of CFB viewership.

The SL just undoes the consolidation of the biggest programs by the P2 - why would they ever agree to it?

 

[AdamOnFirst]

There may be a super league, but it won't look like this... unless a court decision declares all athletes are school employees and the entire model needs to be melted down and rebuilt, then it's a maybe.

 

[FeralFelidae]

unless a court decision declares all athletes are school employees

Is that such a far reach at this point?

 

[AdamOnFirst]

Is that such a far reach at this point?

No, that’s why added that caveat.

 

[CMcCat]

this is an attempt by the Big 12 and ACC to get more money at the expense of the B10 and SEC. Throwing a lifeline to Iowa State, Syracuse, and Cal? Never going to happen.

Frankly, a real “super league” would start by jettisoning the dead weights in the B10 and SEC and trying to cap the number between 24 and 32. It’s clear that, at the moment, schools like Ohio State, Alabama and Notre Dame aren’t ready to pull the plug on what they already have.

As inept as NU administration appears to the naked eye, I wonder if actually they are on to the fact that NU has no role in the NFL-Superconference end game. The smaller Ryan Field is primarily a concert venue that diverts acts away from Chicago venues and hosts a few MAC football tussles each year.

 

[Katatonic]

Apparently, there isn't any real "relegation" for the P4 schools + ND.

There will be 10 spots open for G4 programs (elevation and relegation makes less sense for college sports (especially these days) due to the heavy roster turnover.

Still, don't see what's in it for the B1G and SEC, much less Fox Sports and ESPN.

Don't know how accurate it is, but current B1G schools would be split between 2 10 school "conferences" with schools from other conferences.

 

[zeek55]

this is an attempt by the Big 12 and ACC to get more money at the expense of the B10 and SEC. Throwing a lifeline to Iowa State, Syracuse, and Cal? Never going to happen.

Frankly, a real “super league” would start by jettisoning the dead weights in the B10 and SEC and trying to cap the number between 24 and 32. It’s clear that, at the moment, schools like Ohio State, Alabama and Notre Dame aren’t ready to pull the plug on what they already have.

As inept as NU administration appears to the naked eye, I wonder if actually they are on to the fact that NU has no role in the NFL-Superconference end game. The smaller Ryan Field is primarily a concert venue that diverts acts away from Chicago venues and hosts a few MAC football tussles each year.

To be fair, there's plenty of reasons why this may never come about: these football factories all need to win 8+ games a year to keep fans and donors happy. CFB fans/donors don't want NFL type records; somebody has to eat all those losses and if the top 24 teams are all together, it'll be top brands turning into Nebraska for extended runs.

At least in the Big Ten/SEC setup, there's a lower half to each league full of state schools with large fanbases that can absorb losses. If those lower half of the leagues disappear, then the top half has to eat the losses.

Is it worth cutting out 4-6 schools from each league just so the top 10-12 make an extra $20 million a year? I doubt it. Nebraska won't be Nebraska if they keep losing 6+ games a year. Ditto Michigan or Penn State. 20-30 years of NFL records will really diminish their brands.

And as far as we go, the administration (this started under Phillips) understood that the most important thing for NU is to raise our athletics situation to the best quality possible while we're in the Big Ten.

Build out all the facilities, try to win as much as you can in every sport and compete at the highest level possible, so that even if the money spigot turns off, at least we have our athletics in the best possible situation to compete.

Nobody at the Ivy League level would spend $1.2-1.4 billion on athletics facilities.

As long as we remain in the Big Ten, we're trying to spend and compete at the top level, and in the future, if we're competing with BC, Stanford, Syracuse, Vandy, Duke, Ga Tech, etc., at least we'll be best positioned to do so.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

To be fair, there's plenty of reasons why this may never come about: these football factories all need to win 8+ games a year to keep fans and donors happy. CFB fans/donors don't want NFL type records; somebody has to eat all those losses and if the top 24 teams are all together, it'll be top brands turning into Nebraska for extended runs.

At least in the Big Ten/SEC setup, there's a lower half to each league full of state schools with large fanbases that can absorb losses. If those lower half of the leagues disappear, then the top half has to eat the losses.

Is it worth cutting out 4-6 schools from each league just so the top 10-12 make an extra $20 million a year? I doubt it. Nebraska won't be Nebraska if they keep losing 6+ games a year. Ditto Michigan or Penn State. 20-30 years of NFL records will really diminish their brands.

And as far as we go, the administration (this started under Phillips) understood that the most important thing for NU is to raise our athletics situation to the best quality possible while we're in the Big Ten.

Build out all the facilities, try to win as much as you can in every sport and compete at the highest level possible, so that even if the money spigot turns off, at least we have our athletics in the best possible situation to compete.

Nobody at the Ivy League level would spend $1.2-1.4 billion on athletics facilities.

As long as we remain in the Big Ten, we're trying to spend and compete at the top level, and in the future, if we're competing with BC, Stanford, Syracuse, Vandy, Duke, Ga Tech, etc., at least we'll be best positioned to do so.

The 8 win standard likely becomes obsolete when the schedule dumps the cupcakes in the preseason for actual games. Fans of these blue bloods care about staying in the upper echelon. That may be 9-3 as opposed to 11-1.

The current set up reminds me of Boxing. Loss a match and the luster immediately leaves that team. The future set up is likely to be more like MMA where a loss doesn’t completely kill you. Fans want good matches. I hate the cupcake games. They will go away at some point, and the small schools will be likely even less funded.

 

[AdamOnFirst]

To be fair, there's plenty of reasons why this may never come about: these football factories all need to win 8+ games a year to keep fans and donors happy. CFB fans/donors don't want NFL type records; somebody has to eat all those losses and if the top 24 teams are all together, it'll be top brands turning into Nebraska for extended runs.

At least in the Big Ten/SEC setup, there's a lower half to each league full of state schools with large fanbases that can absorb losses. If those lower half of the leagues disappear, then the top half has to eat the losses.

Is it worth cutting out 4-6 schools from each league just so the top 10-12 make an extra $20 million a year? I doubt it. Nebraska won't be Nebraska if they keep losing 6+ games a year. Ditto Michigan or Penn State. 20-30 years of NFL records will really diminish their brands.

And as far as we go, the administration (this started under Phillips) understood that the most important thing for NU is to raise our athletics situation to the best quality possible while we're in the Big Ten.

Build out all the facilities, try to win as much as you can in every sport and compete at the highest level possible, so that even if the money spigot turns off, at least we have our athletics in the best possible situation to compete.

Nobody at the Ivy League level would spend $1.2-1.4 billion on athletics facilities.

As long as we remain in the Big Ten, we're trying to spend and compete at the top level, and in the future, if we're competing with BC, Stanford, Syracuse, Vandy, Duke, Ga Tech, etc., at least we'll be best positioned to do so.

See, I actually agree with this way of thinking but not so much because of the wins. Teams like Minnesota, Arkansas, Miss State, etc may not be big national TV eyeball drivers or drive marquee contracts… but who are the people WATCHING those big Ohio State Michigan games? In my opinion many many of them are Arkansas fans, Minnesota fans, etc etc. The lesser teams are patsies to be beaten, but they are ALSO eyeballs to be farmed.

It may be that the elite teams do the math some day and create a 25-32 team blue blood league and make more money, but my hypothesis is that would be an error on their part outside of major legal changes.

 

[CMcCat]

See, I actually agree with this way of thinking but not so much because of the wins. Teams like Minnesota, Arkansas, Miss State, etc may not be big national TV eyeball drivers or drive marquee contracts… but who are the people WATCHING those big Ohio State Michigan games? In my opinion many many of them are Arkansas fans, Minnesota fans, etc etc. The lesser teams are patsies to be beaten, but they are ALSO eyeballs to be farmed.

It may be that the elite teams do the math some day and create a 25-32 team blue blood league and make more money, but my hypothesis is that would be an error on their part outside of major legal changes.

Nobody really cares how many games the Iowa Cubs win. The important thing is that they are grooming the players who will be Chicago Cubs.

That will be Alabama and Michigan in 10 years or sooner. You‘ll go to the Big House because you have an affinity for Michigan and enjoy the experience. You’ll also go because the guys you are watching will be playing for the Lions next season (or even mid-season with callups).

The NFL is the business. Not the NCAA. Not the conferences.

 

[NUCat320]

The English football pyramid is, I think, 5 20-team tiers.

6 college football tiers, regional at the bottom three levels. 10 conference games, two non-conference games. Lower teams can take the guaranteed payouts, higher teams can take the extra home games.

Three teams relegated and promoted at each level, based on an 12 team playoff and a third place game. Equal tv payouts for each team at a given tier, with descending payouts by level.

And un-dissolve the Pac-10 and don’t make NU athletes travel to Piscataway (or even State College) anymore.

Last week, Stanford’s Cameron Brink declared for the WNBA draft rather than playing in the ACC next year. She’s got lots of NIL cash — was in the New Balance commercial that ran during the NCAA tournament. Nobody wants these cross-country conferences.

 

[AdamOnFirst]

Nobody really cares how many games the Iowa Cubs win. The important thing is that they are grooming the players who will be Chicago Cubs.

That will be Alabama and Michigan in 10 years or sooner. You‘ll go to the Big House because you have an affinity for Michigan and enjoy the experience. You’ll also go because the guys you are watching will be playing for the Lions next season (or even mid-season with callups).

The NFL is the business. Not the NCAA. Not the conferences.

The Iowa Cubs do a neat little business because they are the live family entertainment in town in Iowa and the best chance to see baseball. But the Iowa Cubs do not sign billion dollar TV deals. College football has no interest in destroying its own business model as you describe.

 

[CMcCat]

The Iowa Cubs do a neat little business because they are the live family entertainment in town in Iowa and the best chance to see baseball. But the Iowa Cubs do not sign billion dollar TV deals. College football has no interest in destroying its own business model as you describe.

I don’t think college football will control its own fate.

What happens when the UFL starts paying more than the value of college NIL/scholarship programs? The leaks form.

I just listened to West Lot Pirates pod with Jacob Schmidt of TrueNU. It is already clear the value of the NU degree has been diminished in the world of college sports. We must pay to retain our best athletes. There is no question.

Who will pay the most? The NFL which will negotiate ever-exhorbitant TV contracts as they seize control of a labor market driven solely by $ with no value in educational experience.

Now the NFL won’t pay to assume all of college football. Only the top tier, one university affiliate for each NFL team. Everybody else may return to the old days and play for dear Alma mater. Except the stars will depart via the portal for the NFL’s versions of the Iowa Cubs.

 

[zeek55]

See, I actually agree with this way of thinking but not so much because of the wins. Teams like Minnesota, Arkansas, Miss State, etc may not be big national TV eyeball drivers or drive marquee contracts… but who are the people WATCHING those big Ohio State Michigan games? In my opinion many many of them are Arkansas fans, Minnesota fans, etc etc. The lesser teams are patsies to be beaten, but they are ALSO eyeballs to be farmed.

It may be that the elite teams do the math some day and create a 25-32 team blue blood league and make more money, but my hypothesis is that would be an error on their part outside of major legal changes.

Correct, I agree with this 100%.

Michigan-Ohio State draws 15-20 million viewers routinely. Why? Because many millions of other Big Ten fans (and fans of other FBS programs) watch that game.

Michigan and Ohio State probably have 2 of the top 3-5 biggest fanbases in CFB. But even that's probably just around 3-4 million regular viewers for each. They still need lots of viewers from other fanbases to juice the ratings for those top 10-20 matchups against each other or Penn State or Oregon or USC or whoever in the Big Ten future.

Do those other fans of Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, etc. watch that game if they get kicked out of the conference? Eventually they probably don't.

Eventually I don't think a "Super League" or special tier of FBS works; you strangle too many fanbases that will stop generating fans to watch games of the Super League teams.

 

[dillonpgp]

Is it worth cutting out 4-6 schools from each league just so the top 10-12 make an extra $20 million a year?

And that ultimately be the question for schools like Northwestern (and Rutgers, Vanderbilt and Mississippi State etc,). Would you rather restructure B10 revenues and give an extra $10 million to Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and USC, (taking $7-8 million less from Northwestern’s share and the rest of the league) or would you rather be a “free agent” and essentially do what Cal and Stanford did last year?

Because that will be the “test balloon”, IMO. Most likely initiated by Ohio State will be to see if its place as the preeminent “earner” for the money the entire league enjoys will be recognized and rewarded. I can go into the weeds further, but suffice it to say that you could pretty easily get to (at minimum) three tiers of compensation within an 18 member B10, but that’s going to require the “have nots” to sacrifice for the “haves”

When (and it’s a matter of when, not if) that question is raised and answered will determine how quickly a real Super League comes together. And it will most quickly emerge from a handful of schools (think Ohio State, Alabama, Texas and USC) spitballing with FOX putting the idea together and then handpicking which schools get to come in. They’ll get to 12 easily but after that, the agony over being in or out will be the ultimate reality show.

In the case of Northwestern specifically, to what extent is it willing to go the route of its academic peers elsewhere (think Rice, Cal and Stanford) in terms of sacrificing financial compensation to play in the big kid’s athletic sandbox? (The same question would be posed to Vanderbilt in the SEC).

 

[NUCat320]

I don’t think college football will control its own fate.

What happens when the UFL starts paying more than the value of college NIL/scholarship programs? The leaks form.

I just listened to West Lot Pirates pod with Jacob Schmidt of TrueNU. It is already clear the value of the NU degree has been diminished in the world of college sports. We must pay to retain our best athletes. There is no question.

Who will pay the most? The NFL which will negotiate ever-exhorbitant TV contracts as they seize control of a labor market driven solely by $ with no value in educational experience.

Now the NFL won’t pay to assume all of college football. Only the top tier, one university affiliate for each NFL team. Everybody else may return to the old days and play for dear Alma mater. Except the stars will depart via the portal for the NFL’s versions of the Iowa Cubs.

This scenario is absurd. It has been proven time and again that nobody wants a second pro league. Good seats available for the Michigan Panthers if you’re interested.

The reason that college football is so popular is because of tradition, state affiliations, and alumni bases.

There is nobody from the NFL or university athletic departments that want to upset the current model, wherein athletic departments take in boatloads of money on unpaid services, and the NFL lets the NCAA develop the players from teens into men. Colleges take on all the risk, but there is no risk because there is no payment.

Nobody would watch a second-tier, developmental football league, because a championship would be inherently meaningless. However, college football — through a century of tradition — has uniquely turned this second tier into a wildly profitable business.

NIL money is coming from rich people with money to blow not to generate a profit, but to buy their favorite team a championship. Very few NIL deals have a positive ROI for the person writing the check. And they are not intended to.

The gigantic money fountain dries up if the alumni connections, state affiliations, and century of tradition are gone.

 

[dillonpgp]

Neb. AD foresees 'eat what you kill' revenue model

New Nebraska athletic director Troy Dannen told ESPN he expects revenue distribution in college sports to become more performance-based over time, resulting in an "eat what you kill" model.

www.espn.com

Count Nebraska amongst the schools ready to divide the Big Ten into “haves and have nots”

 

[Jaguar 88]

Nobody really cares how many games the Iowa Cubs win. The important thing is that they are grooming the players who will be Chicago Cubs.

That will be Alabama and Michigan in 10 years or sooner. You‘ll go to the Big House because you have an affinity for Michigan and enjoy the experience. You’ll also go because the guys you are watching will be playing for the Lions next season (or even mid-season with callups).

The NFL is the business. Not the NCAA. Not the conferences.

Nobody will really care about any of this if the economy collapses within that time frame. I have better(cheaper) things to do with my $ for entertainment than sit down for 4 hours and watch football if it isn't one of my teams.

 

[CMcCat]

Correct, I agree with this 100%.

Michigan-Ohio State draws 15-20 million viewers routinely. Why? Because many millions of other Big Ten fans (and fans of other FBS programs) watch that game.

Michigan and Ohio State probably have 2 of the top 3-5 biggest fanbases in CFB. But even that's probably just around 3-4 million regular viewers for each. They still need lots of viewers from other fanbases to juice the ratings for those top 10-20 matchups against each other or Penn State or Oregon or USC or whoever in the Big Ten future.

Do those other fans of Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, etc. watch that game if they get kicked out of the conference? Eventually they probably don't.

Eventually I don't think a "Super League" or special tier of FBS works; you strangle too many fanbases that will stop generating fans to watch games of the Super League teams.

This scenario is absurd. It has been proven time and again that nobody wants a second pro league. Good seats available for the Michigan Panthers if you’re interested.

The reason that college football is so popular is because of tradition, state affiliations, and alumni bases.

There is nobody from the NFL or university athletic departments that want to upset the current model, wherein athletic departments take in boatloads of money on unpaid services, and the NFL lets the NCAA develop the players from teens into men. Colleges take on all the risk, but there is no risk because there is no payment.

Nobody would watch a second-tier, developmental football league, because a championship would be inherently meaningless. However, college football — through a century of tradition — has uniquely turned this second tier into a wildly profitable business.

NIL money is coming from rich people with money to blow not to generate a profit, but to buy their favorite team a championship. Very few NIL deals have a positive ROI for the person writing the check. And they are not intended to.

The gigantic money fountain dries up if the alumni connections, state affiliations, and century of tradition are gone.

What do you mean? Millions of people watch a developmental league every fall Saturday! But now the talent is no longer free and must be paid.

Rich alums? They will be out bid by richer NFL owners once the TV contracts are consolidated under their control. Picture the Denver Broncos calling up Shadeur Sanders last year for the last two games of the season. Two worthless games turn into two of the most highly rated of the regular season. Ching, Ching.

 

[FeralFelidae]

What do you mean? Millions of people watch a developmental league every fall Saturday! But now the talent is no longer free and must be paid.

Rich alums? They will be out bid by richer NFL owners once the TV contracts are consolidated under their control. Picture the Denver Broncos calling up Shadeur Sanders last year for the last two games of the season. Two worthless games turn into two of the most highly rated of the regular season. Ching, Ching.

If schools become directly affiliated with NFL teams, that would be utterly shameful.

 

[kaTNap]

Count Nebraska amongst the schools ready to divide the Big Ten into “haves and have nots”

That's rich, since most of Nebraska's glory years were when they lived in a conference with 6 "have nots" and usually faced only one real national power in the regular season.

 

[Sheffielder]

A reddit thread linked to a Sportico article today that proported to have access to the pitch deck for the Super League:

College Football ‘Super League’ Pitch Deck Details Breakaway Plan

A document distributed in February by College Sports Tomorrow laid out a proposed "NIL Salary Cap" and a breakdown of its seven geographic divisions.

www.sportico.com

I figured it was at least interesting enough to share the division proposal...

I am with the majority who believe this idea will probably never come to fruition, but I will also say the proposal is pretty interesting and I *DO* think it could be viable if either A) the overlords can't find a way to get NIL under control, and/or B) the lucrative tv contracts somehow become less lucrative, which I believe could happen in the next 10 or so years...and before you shake your head no at that possibility, tell me how you knew all along that by 2024 that cable/satellite would be dying out in favor of streaming.

 

[CoralSpringsCat]

 

[NUCat320]

A reddit thread linked to a Sportico article today that proported to have access to the pitch deck for the Super League:

College Football ‘Super League’ Pitch Deck Details Breakaway Plan

A document distributed in February by College Sports Tomorrow laid out a proposed "NIL Salary Cap" and a breakdown of its seven geographic divisions.

www.sportico.com

I figured it was at least interesting enough to share the division proposal...

I am with the majority who believe this idea will probably never come to fruition, but I will also say the proposal is pretty interesting and I *DO* think it could be viable if either A) the overlords can't find a way to get NIL under control, and/or B) the lucrative tv contracts somehow become less lucrative, which I believe could happen in the next 10 or so years...and before you shake your head no at that possibility, tell me how you knew all along that by 2024 that cable/satellite would be dying out in favor of streaming.

It’s a pretty interesting write up, and it’s truly a shame that nobody at the NCAA had been working on anything like it.

NIL ceilings and floors. Revenue sharing. I wish they nodded to academic qualification and eligibility, but oh well.

I would strongly prefer Louisville and Mizzou and Cincinnati on the schedule to Oregon and Rutgers and UCLA. (Admitting here that I would miss Nebraska in this hypothetical.)

Seriously, amazing that nobody in the NCAA had the foresight. Derrick Gragg was in that office for a while, right? (Sorry.)

 

[CMcCat]

So compare NU to the Mountain West teams that don’t make this 70-team cut: Colorado State and Fresno State.

CSU averaged 26,500 at home. Fresno State averaged 40,000.

Which is more attractive of those three as you consider size of alumni base and other metrics that convert to cash?

Now assume that 70 is too many to be sustainable.

Does NU have a place in any of this? I don’t think so.

 

[CoralSpringsCat]

So compare NU to the Mountain West teams that don’t make this 70-team cut: Colorado State and Fresno State.

CSU averaged 26,500 at home. Fresno State averaged 40,000.

Which is more attractive of those three as you consider size of alumni base and other metrics that convert to cash?

Now assume that 70 is too many to be sustainable.

Does NU have a place in any of this? I don’t think so.

Are you saying CSU and Fresno State are more desirable than Northwestern?

 

[Sheffielder]

So compare NU to the Mountain West teams that don’t make this 70-team cut: Colorado State and Fresno State.

CSU averaged 26,500 at home. Fresno State averaged 40,000.

Which is more attractive of those three as you consider size of alumni base and other metrics that convert to cash?

Now assume that 70 is too many to be sustainable.

Does NU have a place in any of this? I don’t think so.

Well...that's the thing...

80 is too many. You can't get 80 to agree on much. 40? Maybe. We'll be in the first or second round of cuts.

But I've always said...if in 20 years Northwestern doesn't make the semi-pro cut and we have an annual regional schedule against Iowa, Illinois, NIU, and a few others, and an end-of-season exhibition/celebration/destination/"bowl" game in a destination city coordinated between us and an amicable opponent...that's fine by me.

 

[CappyNU]

So compare NU to the Mountain West teams that don’t make this 70-team cut: Colorado State and Fresno State.

CSU averaged 26,500 at home. Fresno State averaged 40,000.

Which is more attractive of those three as you consider size of alumni base and other metrics that convert to cash?

Now assume that 70 is too many to be sustainable.

Does NU have a place in any of this? I don’t think so.

 

[zeek55]

So compare NU to the Mountain West teams that don’t make this 70-team cut: Colorado State and Fresno State.

CSU averaged 26,500 at home. Fresno State averaged 40,000.

Which is more attractive of those three as you consider size of alumni base and other metrics that convert to cash?

Now assume that 70 is too many to be sustainable.

Does NU have a place in any of this? I don’t think so.

Fan support does matter but so does actual money in terms of donations.

Our rich donors are willing to spend like a top 5 team in terms of facilities.

We're going to have $1.3 billion worth of modern/top-of-the-line facilities when the stadium is done. 0 chance any MWC team has facilities that come anywhere close to that.

Once those facilities are done, and once we get school/conference directed NIL (i.e. TV money goes to players), I have to imagine we can start getting our big donors to support NIL in a stronger capacity.

We're fortunate to have been in the right place to help build the Big Ten, but this is no longer the free riding Northwestern of the 70s or 80s that wasn't serious about athletics.

Heck you can toss 90s in there when the University struggled to get RF renovated and pay Barnett a competitive salary.

And that applies up and down the AD now. We have some programs that are at or near the top of their respective sports.

Our FB/BB programs have been respectable for an extended time.

Doesn't guarantee us anything but we'll be able to stick with Illinois, Purdue, Minnesota, Indiana, and if not those, we can always go along with Stanford, BC, Duke, WF, etc.

We'll be top of the line in resources where-ever we compete.

If all these changes had happened in the 80s, we'd have been left for dead. But now? The AD will be in the best competitive situation that it's ever been in relative to our peers. That's why it's worth being optimistic about our place in the Big Ten.

We've taken advantage at the right time to get everything in order for NU athletics to compete at the highest level possible. Even when I was a student, I'd have struggled to imagine the University reaching this point.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Are you saying CSU and Fresno State are more desirable than Northwestern?

Hope that is a joke.

 

[Sheffielder]

Fan support does matter but so does actual money in terms of donations.

Our rich donors are willing to spend like a top 5 team in terms of facilities.

We're going to have $1.3 billion worth of modern/top-of-the-line facilities when the stadium is done. 0 chance any MWC team has facilities that come anywhere close to that.

Once those facilities are done, and once we get school/conference directed NIL (i.e. TV money goes to players), I have to imagine we can start getting our big donors to support NIL in a stronger capacity.

We're fortunate to have been in the right place to help build the Big Ten, but this is no longer the free riding Northwestern of the 70s or 80s that wasn't serious about athletics.

Heck you can toss 90s in there when the University struggled to get RF renovated and pay Barnett a competitive salary.

And that applies up and down the AD now. We have some programs that are at or near the top of their respective sports.

Our FB/BB programs have been respectable for an extended time.

Doesn't guarantee us anything but we'll be able to stick with Illinois, Purdue, Minnesota, Indiana, and if not those, we can always go along with Stanford, BC, Duke, WF, etc.

We'll be top of the line in resources where-ever we compete.

If all these changes had happened in the 80s, we'd have been left for dead. But now? The AD will be in the best competitive situation that it's ever been in relative to our peers. That's why it's worth being optimistic about our place in the Big Ten.

We've taken advantage at the right time to get everything in order for NU athletics to compete at the highest level possible. Even when I was a student, I'd have struggled to imagine the University reaching this point.

If there is a seismic shift in how college football operates in the next X years, we are doomed...for exactly the reason the Dark Ages lasted as long as they did, and why UChicago is no longer competing in Big Ten Athletics: the administration.

If this happened when Morty and Phillips were here, we'd be fine.

We have Gragg and Schill.

 

[NUCat320]

If there is a seismic shift in how college football operates in the next X years, we are doomed...for exactly the reason the Dark Ages lasted as long as they did, and why UChicago is no longer competing in Big Ten Athletics: the administration.

If this happened when Morty and Phillips were here, we'd be fine.

We have Gragg and Schill.

Schill came from Oregon. He understands the power of a strong athletic department.

 

[CoralSpringsCat]

Schill came from Oregon. He understands the power of a strong athletic department.

You’d think. Ask Mario Cristobal about Schill.

 

[zeek55]

If there is a seismic shift in how college football operates in the next X years, we are doomed...for exactly the reason the Dark Ages lasted as long as they did, and why UChicago is no longer competing in Big Ten Athletics: the administration.

If this happened when Morty and Phillips were here, we'd be fine.

We have Gragg and Schill.

Our Trustees are as pro athletics as any you'll find in the SEC or Big Ten. They're not going to accept some sort of Dark Age where athletics is de-emphasized.

I get the skepticism about Schill/Gragg, but they aren't making the big $ decisions that will get put to the Ryans and the rest of the Trustees.

And as @NUCat320 says, Schill knows the value in athletics as a differentiator for us. Oregon would have been left behind if it was the Oregon of the 80s or 90s.

Big Ten athletics is a huge competitive advantage for competing against Ivy League schools and the rest for students, some do want to attend schools where they can support top level FB/BB teams.

Other than Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt, ND, and us, you don't find it in many places.