OT: - Realignment? | Page 32 | The Boneyard

OT: Realignment?

Joined
Mar 17, 2021
Messages
117
Reaction Score
192
14.876M within 100 miles of Storrs but that jumps to over 26M if you go to 120 miles.
VCE did a great job highlighting a few of the report's many inconsistencies and flaws. Two broad, anecdotal critiques I'd add are that the report seems to often:

-overvalue the relevance/market share of some lesser-brand schools just because they're in, or close to, a major metro.

-undervalue the relevance/market share of some large well-branded state schools within their states.

UConn is far and away the most popular school in Connecticut. At a bare minimum he should've factored the 3.5 million people that live here into his initial equation/calculation.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
6,374
Reaction Score
16,572
NEVER ... use USNWR as a baseline on academic ranking.

OK. I grew up on campuses: son of a professor who became a college president. However, the media (and I could compile list of quite a few) pull out that USNWR. And it is easily debunked and consistently pissed on by the academic community. We know the holes.

In a Malcolm Gladwell podcast, he highlights a story of a University President in NJ who sends his homemade hot sauce to as many college presidents as he can think of ... because peer review is a large part of the ranking of USNWR. He states that exactly 2 other presidents have been on his campus; let alone have interaction to know his school - particularly if the 50 states is the subset. According to Reed College in Oregon statistics study, the algorithm gives great weight to this peer review.

Recently, a national sports columnist made the case that Memphis ... was just as good as Cincinnati, BYU, Houston, Utah, UCF. Academically. It is round 100+ number in the USNWR. Depending on your department ... you're not looking at U of Memphis as near the top of that grouping
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
8,509
Reaction Score
8,011
Market share as being "near large populations" doesn't count for much any more.

What really is now more important is...what share of the national public will tune into your games?

You can be based in Philadelphia but that means little if your games do not draw.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,291
Reaction Score
2,686
NEVER ... use USNWR as a baseline on academic ranking.

OK. I grew up on campuses: son of a professor who became a college president. However, the media (and I could compile list of quite a few) pull out that USNWR. And it is easily debunked and consistently pissed on by the academic community. We know the holes.

In a Malcolm Gladwell podcast, he highlights a story of a University President in NJ who sends his homemade hot sauce to as many college presidents as he can think of ... because peer review is a large part of the ranking of USNWR. He states that exactly 2 other presidents have been on his campus; let alone have interaction to know his school - particularly if the 50 states is the subset. According to Reed College in Oregon statistics study, the algorithm gives great weight to this peer review.

Recently, a national sports columnist made the case that Memphis ... was just as good as Cincinnati, BYU, Houston, Utah, UCF. Academically. It is round 100+ number in the USNWR. Depending on your department ... you're not looking at U of Memphis as near the top of that grouping
I agree with this. USNWR is a terrible reflection of a school's academics. It's biases things that just aren't that important.
 

CL82

NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
56,972
Reaction Score
208,797
I agree with this. USNWR is a terrible reflection of a school's academics. It's biases things that just aren't that important.
But it has created a whole cottage industry on gaming their stats. Northeastern in particular has been successful in doing that and isn’t particularly shy about noting it.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
1,282
Reaction Score
4,903
That deck is interesting.. as first it shows that Boise spends much less than it's projected peers in the AAC, meaning success would likely be harder to come by. More importantly it didn't just so revenue largely flat with the MWC distribution they get now, they showed a slight loss (even before accounting for the three departing members and a reduction in TV revenue).
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
5,512
Reaction Score
13,311
If it goes to 12, within a decade it will be 16.
Isn’t the plan to break P5 football away from the NCAA
If they set up their own governing body . Than I suspect they can completely control the playoffs without pressure from the NCAA .It can be 4 to all inclusive.
More importantly they get to keep all the revenue for themselves. I suspect G5 and Indies not named ND will be excluded.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
8,161
Reaction Score
21,326
Isn’t the plan to break P5 football away from the NCAA
If they set up their own governing body . Than I suspect they can completely control the playoffs without pressure from the NCAA .It can be 4 to all inclusive.
More importantly they get to keep all the revenue for themselves. I suspect G5 and Indies not named ND will be excluded.

they will do this for basketball too and there is a ton of cash available for the taking
 
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
926
Reaction Score
2,067
Isn’t the plan to break P5 football away from the NCAA
If they set up their own governing body . Than I suspect they can completely control the playoffs without pressure from the NCAA .It can be 4 to all inclusive.
More importantly they get to keep all the revenue for themselves. I suspect G5 and Indies not named ND will be excluded.
They have already "broken away" for football.

The 4 team CFP is a deal made directly with the P5. There is no involvement with the NCAA and the NCAA receives no money from it. The P5 receives the majority of the money after sharing a few crumbs with the G5.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
5,512
Reaction Score
13,311
They have already "broken away" for football.

The 4 team CFP is a deal made directly with the P5. There is no involvement with the NCAA and the NCAA receives no money from it. The P5 receives the majority of the money after sharing a few crumbs with the G5.
Please provide a source.
Here is mine:

The following is a breakdown of the CFP revenue distribution:
  • For the 2021-22 academic year:
    1. Each conference will receive $300,000 for each of its schools when the school's football team meets the NCAA's APR for participation in a postseason football game. Each independent institution will also receive $300,000 when its football team meets that standard.
    2. A conference will receive $6 million for each team that is selected for a Playoff Semifinal. There will be no additional distribution to conferences whose teams qualify for the national championship game. A conference will receive $4 million for each team that plays in a non-playoff bowl under the arrangement.
    3. Each conference whose team participates in a Playoff Semifinal, Cotton, Fiesta, or Peach bowls, or in the national championship game will receive $2.63 million to cover expenses for each game.
  • Based on calculations from the 2020-21 season the following distributions were made in the spring of 2021 (Estimates for the 2021-22 season will be finalized following the 2022 CFP National Championship.):
    1. Each of the 10 conferences received a base amount. For conferences that have contracts for their champions to participate in the Orange, Rose, or Sugar bowls, the base combined with the full academic performance pool was approximately $57 million for each conference. The five conferences that do not have contacts for their champions to participate in the Orange, Rose or Sugar bowls received approximately $83 million in aggregate (full academic pool plus base). The conferences distribute these funds as they choose. Notre Dame received a payment of $2.5 million by meeting the APR standard; the other three independents shared $1.85 million.
    2. Certain conferences in the Football Championship Subdivision received approximately $2.85 million in aggregate.
 
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Messages
32
Reaction Score
52
As the article states, here's the dilemma. The SEC wants to rule the world and likes the current 4-at-large format. For an 8 team playoff, the other 4 conferences want the 5 conference champions plus 3-at-larges. I guess that the SEC thinks they can have all 4-at-larges some year.
 
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
926
Reaction Score
2,067
@AZHuskiePop

My point is they've already broken from the NCAA.

The NCAA doesn't receive any of the CFP playoff money and the championship being played for is not an NCAA championship.

Yes the P5 skim some money off the top to share w the G5 and others but the lions share stays w them.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
2,508
Reaction Score
8,218
Some interesting perspective when it comes to realignment. I've always thought that while football drives the AD bus, it's still a cog in the wheel of a university (sorry for the mixed but related metaphors)....

 

shizzle787

King Shizzle DCCLXXXVII of the Cesspool
Joined
Oct 19, 2015
Messages
11,961
Reaction Score
18,438

They are pumping this out because they know the realignment waive is over and they need to keep their viewership numbers high. It's not happening. The Big 12 will be 12 for a while.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2021
Messages
339
Reaction Score
317
This SHOULD kill any crazy rumor about Marshall staying in the C-USA.


Also, a very good map using Google Trends detailing college football searches from a poster named jhn31 at another message board.

 

shizzle787

King Shizzle DCCLXXXVII of the Cesspool
Joined
Oct 19, 2015
Messages
11,961
Reaction Score
18,438
This SHOULD kill any crazy rumor about Marshall staying in the C-USA.


Also, a very good map using Google Trends detailing college football searches from a poster named jhn31 at another message board.

You missed the main point of the article- we are in discussions with C-USA as a football-only member.
 

Online statistics

Members online
791
Guests online
4,850
Total visitors
5,641

Forum statistics

Threads
157,017
Messages
4,077,160
Members
9,967
Latest member
UChuskman


Top Bottom